>Is that equivalent sound quality to a 1992 Saisho CD walkman or 12,000ukp worth of Linn CD12?
No way... it is equivalent to the 1979 TTL based "beta testing" CD player designed by Phillips/Magnavox/(i think)Sony for their new "smaller than a record" disc.;-)
I think they mean it will play any frequency between 20-20kHz with an accurate representation (say less than 0.01% THD). Just IMHO.
Because the carpool example distastefully deals with death. The other also deals with death, since parking in the Doctor's Only spot at a hospital slows down the doctor trying to save a near death patients life.
I fail to see how reverse-engineering kills, or defames the dead. Please give some real-life, already happened, kinds of examples relating to the topic and perhaps you can change my view.
I do see, however, how reverse-engineering could _save_ a life in when the supporter of a proprietary heart monitor is out of business.
>Remember, the INTENT of piracy laws is to allow people to protect the product of their hard work and not have some 3rd party make cheap knockoffs of it and undercut the author into bankruptcy.
Piracy laws, eh?
No, just old fashioned copyright laws. There to protect the consumer from accidentally purchasing false copies of books printed on a printing press. That's the TRUE spirit of copyright. It doesn't directly protect the company, it directly protects the consumer.
Sorry, but a "knockoff" is a product designed to fool the buyer into thinking it is "the real thing". It is a fake. Compaq didn't do this with their clones: Even if they made cheap junk, it CLEARLY said Compaq on it, not IBM. This doesn't hurt IBM's sales, since soon the company making cheap junk will be found out, and the good publicity for "quality" IBM products will improve sales drastically.
Now, of course if the cheap junk WERE a knockoff, it would look identical to IBM units, and have an IBM logo on it, just as knockoff jeans have a "Levi's 501" red tab on the back pocket. They are trying to fool YOU, the CUSTOMER, which is what copyright law is about stopping. It ISN'T about protecting the sales of some company. That is what the free market is about.
You are certainly NOT taking the sale away from another company when you clearly state you aren't that company. The consumer has chosen not to buy from the "original" company.
If you can't match the competition, try another idea.
>But it's functionally identical to the original. It replaces the original 100%. That's a lost sale of the original.
If we all thought like that, we'd all be driving black cars. (Ok, I won't hold you in suspense: Henry Ford refused to release a car in any colour but black). We'd all be using Wegner and Victorinox swiss army knives. The model of freedom is choice. There would be no leatherman if reverse-engineering didn't exist. I like freedom. I like to be able to choose. That's what copyright is about.
When you buy a leatherman, do you do it because you didn't realise it wasn't a Victorinox, or do you do it because it offers more value to you? That's the difference between a fake or a knockoff, and a reverse-engineered product -- the choice. And, like I've said, that is what the free market is about.
With a knockoff Victorinox, you ARE causing the company to lose a sale -- you would have bought a Victorinox, that is what you wanted. Not a "V1ctorin0x". You didn't have the choice, "V1ctorin0x" made it for you. That is very wrong.
>How come if I undercut software sales by making and selling software copies, I am called a pirate?
Your copy is identical. You would be breaking the law if you made a Nintendo(tm) that used the identical parts and identical shape and identical trademarked name on the front of it.
>Yet if I undercut hardware sales by making and selling software copies of the console, I am called a emulator who "reverse engineered" this console, or other words that legitimizes what I did.
Reverse engineering implies that your "copy" is similar, not the same. You certainly CAN do this with software.
For example:
When the IBM PC was released, it was $3000 (or so). Much more expensive than IBM should be charging. So Compaq decided that they could make money by selling a compatible (read: clone, copy) machine. But they were stuck: To make it compatible, they needed to use the IBM BIOS (which IBM wasn't going to license to them). But, ahhh, why not do to the BIOS what they had done to the hardware? Make it compatible, but not identical.
They hired engineers without a clue of how the IBM BIOS was programmed, stuck them in a room, and had them reverse engineer the IBM BIOS, without looking at the code. Just by trial and error, and scientific hypothesis. They then created their Compaq BIOS, which provided the same services, but using their own ideas. And, there you have it, a 100% compatible BIOS not using any IBM code. Totally legal, since NO copyrights had been broken. And, this is an example of "copying" software.
Now, if you wanted to, you could do the same with Office 2000, if you had the time and money and wish to do so. You wouldn't be breaking any laws (except, perhaps, "look and feel", which could be worked around). You would end up with Office 2000, using your own personal code set. In essence, a copy, or clone of the software. But NOT a pirated copy.
That's how a console is legally reverse engineered any copied.
>Either way, my actions hurt sales by copying someone else's product and not producing anything new.
You produced something new. You produced a new console that works like the old one, or a new software that works like the old one.
>How is that good?
Because it provides the consumer with protection should the original company go out of business, or choose not to continue the product. Imagine if there were no IBM clones, but IBM had become popular. What if, somehow, IBM suddenly went out of business? Ohoh... now there's trouble. But, now with clones abounding, the world won't come to a standstill today if IBM dives.
Also, for example, those of us who still use Nintendo (original) (like me) like the fact that clones are avaliable since Nintendo has dumped this console. See how the world benefits from this? When my Nintendo original sets on fire, I can buy a clone, and still legally use my cartridges.
And, amazingly, it benefits the original company. What happens if/when Apple goes out business? Yes, you Macintosh users, you are ROYALLY screwed. You can join the Amiga lot looking in garage sales for parts.:-) So I, like a lot of consumers, choose to avoid this possiblilty by not buying Macintosh. This leads to less market share, and less exposure for the company. Less sales. Bad. If Macintosh were still allowing clones, well, I'd have a Mac, NOW (once the clones force the prices back down to earth).
>Now either BOTH activities must be evil or they must BOTH be allowed
No. One is illegal, and bad. The other legal, and good.
Verbatim copying is illegal because you add nothing of value. Making _similar_, _compatible_ things is not, because you add the value of protection to the consumer. Why? Because a reverse-engineered copy proves you understand how the original works. You can therefore improve upon it. A verbatim copy shows you have no understanding of the device/software, and therefore cannot sustain the life of the device.
Oh, here's another few examples of copied, but NOT pirated software: Freedos. Linux. DR-DOS. OpenDOS.
Freedos and DR-DOS and OpenDOS are compatible with MS-DOS (reverse engineered). Would you tell me that Freedos, DR-DOS, and OpenDOS add no value to MS-DOS whatsoever?
Would you tell me that Linux adds no value to Unix whatsoever?
The fact is, the law, and morals in general, are designed to protect the citizens as a group, and not some single company. It's a free market. If your company can't stand some legal competition, then pack up and go.
>Well you may or may not have noticed that I am not, in fact, the "real" Bruce Perens. I suspect that I have been bitchslapped by the staff.
If that is the reason why, that is DAMN STUPID. I'd bet you'd find 100's of Bruce Perens in Australia. I don't know your real name, but what I can tell you is that names aren't OWNED. I don't OWN my name. I happen to use it. I do own my Social Security Number, because it IS unique. Names really just aren't.
>although I think that would normally put my posts at 0 by default.
IIRC too, that is what should happen. The "bitchslapping" (-1 perma score) is one of those less advertised features (since it is a blatant attempt at censorship).
>I suspect that I have been bitchslapped by the staff. I sent an email to Rob Malda, and we'll see if that's the case.
I wouldn't bother -- I've attempted moderation discussions with him too. He's tight as a clam. Won't even reply with a "thanks for mailing me, but I was too bust to read your mail. it was forwarded to blah blah blah." type of message. It's to be expected from a company president.;-)
Talk to Andover.net see what they have to say about it.
(And if slashdot wasn't so goddamn broken I wouldn't have to resubmit this OVER AND OVER AGAIN until their goddamn post timer runs out. You have to type two or three comments at once because you have to keep waiting for the ERRORS to be transmitted so you can REPOST AGAIN AND AGAIN until slashdot isn't broken for a minute.)
..because you missed it in your sentence. You may also need to replace your comma with a semi-colon when you add this very necessary word in. The word such could also be used in place of what, if you prefer.
"You seem very fond of the word 'definitely,' what a pity you can't spell it correctly."
BTW: I am sorry if this is posted twice. I get "buffer socket errors" from slashdot lately. Is something else broken?
The low down of the init directory structure for slackware (and I've never used no BSD... but I do LOVE Slackware's CLEAR and CONSICE way of initializing the system):
Inside/etc/rc.d: rc.0 (linked to rc.6) -- Run level 0/6 (computer is rebooted) rc.4 -- Run level 4. For XDM. rc.K -- Run level 1. Single user mode. rc.M -- Run level "multiuser". Guess...:-) rc.S -- System initialization script. Run at boot time.
less important (but still necessary) files in/etc/rc.d include: rc.cdrom -- Makes the CDROM automount at boot. rc.inet1 -- Starts up base INET system. rc.inet2 -- "This shell script boots up the entire INET system."
Slackware uses the BSD system (according to slackware themselves). This is pulled from rc.sysvinit (the basic sysv compatibility script):
"rc.sysvinit: This file provides basic compatibility with SystemV style startup scripts. The SystemV style init system places start/stop scripts for each runlevel into directories such as/etc/rc.d/rc3.d/ (for runlevel 3) instead of starting them from/etc/rc.d/rc.M. This makes for a lot more init scripts, and a more complicated execution path to follow through if something goes wrong. For this reason, Slackware has always used the traditional BSD style init script layout."
Patrick Volkerding doesn't like SysV init. So no, I have a feeling there is NO similarity between slackware init and SysV init (to quell the previous argument too). And Patrick Volkerding HIMSELF says "Slackware has always used the traditional BSD style init script layout".
There you have it. Slackware == BSD init. I like it.:-)
>they just develop the ability to tune it out, much like they have developed the ability to tune out violence, hunger, suffering etc. >It's so much easier that way, isn't it? They wouldn't put it on TV if they didn't want people to tune it out, now would they?
Another fun commodore trick: Turn the sound up to full volume while loading something from disk... You can HEAR the slowness of the serial bus! And yes, Commodore made some of the lowest build quality computers ever (but when they worked, they worked well). I blew up three power bricks and two boards in 10 years. I still see PCjrs that work, for comparison. Of course, to Commodore's tribute, their later model machines improved quality very much. My C64C [white on white] still goes, along with the 1541, 1702, and SGfxjr. (that's diskdrive, monitor, and printer adaptor to the uninatiated):-)
Think of it like this -- most of those power supplies are made in China. They are made as cheap as possible. Especially some of the non CSA/UL approved ones. The fan is 1/3 of the cost of the PSU. Why is it there? Fffffffffffftttt.... SSsssssssssssssttt... BAM!!! SMOKE! FIRE! Just like a car exhaust, choking off the most heat producing component in a computer (the power supply for sure) is like sticking a banana in your muffler. REALLY bad idea. I've seen the occasional computer with a dead PSU fan that's been on overnight, and on when I looked at it. When I opened it to replace the PSU, I had to use my clothing to hold on to the the HDD (which has to be moved to get at the PSU). It was that hot. At LEAST 70 degrees Celsius. I should also note... if you purposely defeat safety things like PSU fans and burn down your house, well... the insurance company isn't likely to help you out.
What drives me insane are the losers that leave their seat in the reclined position during MEALS. For Gods sake, give me some peace -- the airplane is already a meat locker in the cheap section...
Yeah, I know with MOST airlines people are _required_ to keep their seats up during meals. Not so on Air Canada. Reminder to self: Ask about the rules before laying out the cash.:-)
Bingo. If you have only a one man staff for over 100 people that is... In that case:
Windows 9x: $250 gets you an OS in a box. Hope you like it. Supporting it costs very little because you can do very little with it. Like "A meal in a can" it's server capabilities are laudable only as an example not to follow -- don't pack so much crap into something that is already bursting at the seams.
Windows NT/2k: $$$$$ gets you an OS in a paper sleeve. It doesn't matter wether you like it or not because once the managers see it you are stuck with it. Supporting it costs very much because you can't do anything with it properly. Takes about 1 server for like 10 clients. Sorta like duct tape when it is used on anything but ducts.
Linux: No money gets you an OS on an FTP site. For one man, supporting that many users is going to cost extreme $$$$$$. But you can do it all on one machine. Just like a big swiss army knife.
Of course, a smart company (too bad these don't exist) would hire 5 people (one per 20), run Linux, and buy X-Terms. This is cheaper than ANY of the Windows solutions I have ever seen...
>Besides, isn't half of the point of having a cell phone making sure that you can be found?
Not to me. The point of having any type of wireless communications device (to me) is that I can be _reached_ anywhere. That doesn't mean I want anyone and their brother to know my location. It just means I want to be able to communicate with them. Isn't this the same point as the idea of internet communications? You can be where you want, when you want, and can still communicate with others.
Qbasic (free with DOS/Win 95+) or QuickBasic ($$$) fixes that. I think it makes a great beginner language, because you can make a half decent program quickly, with just enough code, and it is still readable -- if you take advantage of the sub/function statements. And it comes with games for the kids to play too...;-)
I'll risk a point to say this: The Trident 8900, while dead slow, is supported so well, it is nearly unbelieveable nowadays. Even a few DOS games had support directly for it, and the setup disks had enough Trident 8900 specific customizations that it puts any other card (including my G200) to shame.
Time for us 15A/120V users to get 220V service... or more circuits. You aren't supposed to load a 15A line more than 1850 watts. Computer supply: 300W + 1600 watts = too much.:-)
>Linux would have to decide whether it wants to be on desktop or on the Server side.
You have Linux (the kernel) and Linux Distribution (most everything else) confused. The linux kernel simply gives software easy access to the hardware (among other tasks). Currently distributions like RedHat and Mandrake focus on the desktop/ease of use market (IMHO), and distributions like Slackware focus on the server market (again, IMHO).
Of course, there isn't any reason why someone can't invent "desktop Linux". I suppose that _was_ what LinuxOne had in mind...:-)
>Windows is a clear winner on the Desktop for its Ease of use
Your opinion, not mine. Show a little proof from a reputable source (no, this doesn't include any ZD publications), and this point will make sense.
>Windows is a clear winner on......the amount of desktop apps it has
Again, your opinion, not mine. Personally, I have found Linux can do more for me desktopwise than Windows -- and at a price I can afford. What can you do in Windows that cannot be done (perhaps in a different way) in Linux?
>Windows......and also the amount of games that has been released for it
This I agree with. There are many more games for windows than there are for Linux. Of course, I think that console systems are best suited to games. Nowadays you save money by buying a console over an uberfast computer, and end up with a games machine that is faster and better suited to the task. So, if you want to buy $1000 worth of Linux computer and a $300 game console, you now have the same gaming capabilities (and game availability) of the $2000 windows game computer.
>Linux is powerful for its robustness on the Server side.
Thanks...:-)
>I dont mind a desktop that crashes twice a day
How many people would say that about any other home electronics/appliances. "Hey hon, the fridge crashed again." "Just push the reboot button". Personally, any crashes are unacceptable to me. They lead to data loss, and time wasted. Two things that royally p*ss me off, and most certainly make the boss mad (fortunately, not at me).
>But I dont want a stable OS to run on my desktop with no games to be played.
Buy a console and a BT848 TV capture card. A lot of people won't even realize it isn't being played on the computer and the games aren't any less fun.
>I made something. I invented it. I can do with it whatever I want to, and can direct my descendants to do with it whatever they want to.
A) Lets say, hypothetically, I made a car. I decide that only people in my family can drive it. I write that into my will. Now, the person inheriting that car doesn't like that idea. They want EVERYONE to enjoy the car. So they let your will default (ie: They don't collect the car). Guess what... Now the GOVERNMENT owns the car and can do what the hell they like with it. So directing your descendants to do what you want them to do just won't work.
B) If you don't like copyright, that's fine. Either run for Prime Minister/President on the platform of your choice, or rescind your citizenship and buy an island. As long as you live in a country that recognises copyright (isn't that all of them?) then you HAVE to abide by the rules of the land. This is in the same vein as wanting to do drugs. If that isn't allowed where you are, then you have to rescind your citizenship and live somewhere where it is legal. The comforts of the land are ONLY provided for people who obey the laws. Part of that is Copyright.
C) If the people want copyright to be 10 years, and someone is elected to do that, then tough nuggies. The majority of people want it that way, and they don't care about your minority ideals. You can still do (B).
>"oh it's not yours anymore, it's in the public domain. Give it to me."
Like I say, if you don't like the laws, change them or move. Your choice. Because right now, in most countries, this is the way it is.
The Act of Copyright exists to allow people to purchase authentic works. It has been mutated today into an act that allows publishers to make money from their art (which I haven't any problem with). The idea of copyrights expiring means that once the company has milked an idea for what it is reasonably worth (and trust me, Super Mario Brothers ain't worth even $5 anymore, I bought mine for $2!), the copyright would expire and allow anyone, including the poor, access to the works.
Why should we all have access to copywritten works, some might ask? The answer is simple: To preserve education and history. If copyrights take 100 years to expire right now, then ALL companies have to do to cover their mistakes is not release their stuff for the 100 years. There aren't many formats out there that will last 100 years. CDs get laser rot (if they are built poorly... they have to be built DAMN good to last 100 years), the magnetism of disks changes, film rots, arcade machines break, contacts on ROM cartridges wear out, etc.
If a company can cover their mistakes through copyright, they can rewrite their history. Sounds scary, no?
If copyright expires at the end of the useful selling period of an item, then the last few sold are still in good shape, and soon copies would exist (legally) ensuring that history is served. There is NO reason why a company needs to keep copyrights on computer games longer than 10 years, IMHO. Tell me ONE company that is still burning ROMS for new Nintendo cartridges of a 10 year old game. If you can't, you likely won't find a company doing it for any other system -- Nintendo was pretty much the most popular console 10 years ago.
>How is a book that was written 50 years ago any less relevant today than when it was first published?
How relevant a work is doesn't mean it deserves to enjoy an infinite copyright. Hell, the works of Plato are still relevant -- do you really think that whoever is still part of Plato's bloodline (probably a few million people now...:-) should be getting money for nothing?
A Chilton's manual for a 1990 Tempo might be useful to someone trying to restore on 50 years from now (therefore relevant). Obviously it isn't going to be in print. And how many people have a preserved Chilton's collection? Should the knowledge of how to repair that car be simply lost? If you ask me, no. Releasing copyright after the reasonably saleable lifetime of the material would allow someone to copy the information. This means that 50 years from now, there could be a full older Chilton's manual collection, simply because if you combine what each Mechanic has, you will probably find a full set. But copying these old books to make a complete set for yourself would be illegal right now. That is just plain wrong, unless you are a masochist and WANT others to spend ungodly amounts of time talking to hundreds of mechanics to get one damn book.
But, at least for Chiltons manuals, you MIGHT have a chance at finding them in a library. Not so for most all computer software. Now THIS is where the real problem is: Libraries need to start carrying computer games for historical and archival purposes, using OUR money. Or copyright has to be diminshed, costing almost nothing. I like the last option.
>There exists VCRs with more than one playback mechanism (GO brand, for example) not to mention commercial tape servers that can access and sort through hundreds of cassettes.
But only one person can use the VCR at a time. Or at least that is the intended design.
>Again, this is a minor quibble over symantecs.
That minor quibble over symantecs means a LOT to the government. Mazda (I think it was Mazda) was able to import their "trucks" because they were classified as cars (they shared the same doors as one of their cars). This reduced their import taxes significantly. Symantecs will work both ways. Chances are you'd be needing to have a giant tape server/w robot, but hey, again, IANAL.
Another, more recent example of symantecs meaning everything is the Rio device. The RIAA attempted to prevent it because they said it was a "home entertainment device" (or something similar). Diamond was able to get away with selling it because according to the law it isn't an MP3 player, it is a computer peripheral...:-)
Ok, so I find out just now that in 1984 a law was passed allowing one-time non-commercial recording of TV shows in the US. So, you are allowed to record Murder She Wrote, IF you watch it once and erase it.
Still, you are not allowed to keep it, and doing so would violate various laws.
This really doesn't give you the legal freedom you'd need to run RecordTV, or to do most anything useful with your VCR (ie: Record movies from Pay-Per-View).
Ah well, you learn something everyday.
I'm still not sure if taping copy protected shows is allowed (ie: Scrambled cable channels). We'll see...
>then we can all record our movies in peace once again
Since most people tape movies from TV for keeps, I think you'd still be violating laws.
The problem with commiting a crime on the internet is that unlike giving away copies of stuff to freinds and family, you are giving it away to many MILLIONS of people. So a small crime becomes a huge crime as fast as your T1 can overflow with connections...
>I suppose some other new technology will appear for people to hate and fear soon enough
I'm working on it -- I'll trade you my prototype for a piece of new technology that people love and enjoy.:-)
Slashdot Mirror
>Is that equivalent sound quality to a 1992 Saisho CD walkman or 12,000ukp worth of Linn CD12?
;-)
No way... it is equivalent to the 1979 TTL based "beta testing" CD player designed by Phillips/Magnavox/(i think)Sony for their new "smaller than a record" disc.
I think they mean it will play any frequency between 20-20kHz with an accurate representation (say less than 0.01% THD). Just IMHO.
>If it were that urgent, I'm sure he could park on the sidewalk.
:-)
At most hospitals I've seen, the sidewalk is the furthest thing away from the hospital. The doctor would be better off finding a normal space.
>If the company is out of business, there's no-one to pay the lawyers to sue you.
I thought we were talking morals, not legals...
>Both examples are egregiously wrong.
Because the carpool example distastefully deals with death. The other also deals with death, since parking in the Doctor's Only spot at a hospital slows down the doctor trying to save a near death patients life.
I fail to see how reverse-engineering kills, or defames the dead. Please give some real-life, already happened, kinds of examples relating to the topic and perhaps you can change my view.
I do see, however, how reverse-engineering could _save_ a life in when the supporter of a proprietary heart monitor is out of business.
>Remember, the INTENT of piracy laws is to allow people to protect the product of their hard work and not have some 3rd party make cheap knockoffs of it and undercut the author into bankruptcy.
Piracy laws, eh?
No, just old fashioned copyright laws. There to protect the consumer from accidentally purchasing false copies of books printed on a printing press. That's the TRUE spirit of copyright. It doesn't directly protect the company, it directly protects the consumer.
Sorry, but a "knockoff" is a product designed to fool the buyer into thinking it is "the real thing". It is a fake. Compaq didn't do this with their clones: Even if they made cheap junk, it CLEARLY said Compaq on it, not IBM. This doesn't hurt IBM's sales, since soon the company making cheap junk will be found out, and the good publicity for "quality" IBM products will improve sales drastically.
Now, of course if the cheap junk WERE a knockoff, it would look identical to IBM units, and have an IBM logo on it, just as knockoff jeans have a "Levi's 501" red tab on the back pocket. They are trying to fool YOU, the CUSTOMER, which is what copyright law is about stopping. It ISN'T about protecting the sales of some company. That is what the free market is about.
You are certainly NOT taking the sale away from another company when you clearly state you aren't that company. The consumer has chosen not to buy from the "original" company.
If you can't match the competition, try another idea.
>But it's functionally identical to the original. It replaces the original 100%. That's a lost sale of the original.
If we all thought like that, we'd all be driving black cars. (Ok, I won't hold you in suspense: Henry Ford refused to release a car in any colour but black). We'd all be using Wegner and Victorinox swiss army knives. The model of freedom is choice. There would be no leatherman if reverse-engineering didn't exist. I like freedom. I like to be able to choose. That's what copyright is about.
When you buy a leatherman, do you do it because you didn't realise it wasn't a Victorinox, or do you do it because it offers more value to you? That's the difference between a fake or a knockoff, and a reverse-engineered product -- the choice. And, like I've said, that is what the free market is about.
With a knockoff Victorinox, you ARE causing the company to lose a sale -- you would have bought a Victorinox, that is what you wanted. Not a "V1ctorin0x". You didn't have the choice, "V1ctorin0x" made it for you. That is very wrong.
>How come if I undercut software sales by making and selling software copies, I am called a pirate?
:-) So I, like a lot of consumers, choose to avoid this possiblilty by not buying Macintosh. This leads to less market share, and less exposure for the company. Less sales. Bad. If Macintosh were still allowing clones, well, I'd have a Mac, NOW (once the clones force the prices back down to earth).
Your copy is identical. You would be breaking the law if you made a Nintendo(tm) that used the identical parts and identical shape and identical trademarked name on the front of it.
>Yet if I undercut hardware sales by making and selling software copies of the console, I am called a emulator who "reverse engineered" this console, or other words that legitimizes what I did.
Reverse engineering implies that your "copy" is similar, not the same. You certainly CAN do this with software.
For example:
When the IBM PC was released, it was $3000 (or so). Much more expensive than IBM should be charging. So Compaq decided that they could make money by selling a compatible (read: clone, copy) machine. But they were stuck: To make it compatible, they needed to use the IBM BIOS (which IBM wasn't going to license to them). But, ahhh, why not do to the BIOS what they had done to the hardware? Make it compatible, but not identical.
They hired engineers without a clue of how the IBM BIOS was programmed, stuck them in a room, and had them reverse engineer the IBM BIOS, without looking at the code. Just by trial and error, and scientific hypothesis. They then created their Compaq BIOS, which provided the same services, but using their own ideas. And, there you have it, a 100% compatible BIOS not using any IBM code. Totally legal, since NO copyrights had been broken. And, this is an example of "copying" software.
Now, if you wanted to, you could do the same with Office 2000, if you had the time and money and wish to do so. You wouldn't be breaking any laws (except, perhaps, "look and feel", which could be worked around). You would end up with Office 2000, using your own personal code set. In essence, a copy, or clone of the software. But NOT a pirated copy.
That's how a console is legally reverse engineered any copied.
>Either way, my actions hurt sales by copying someone else's product and not producing anything new.
You produced something new. You produced a new console that works like the old one, or a new software that works like the old one.
>How is that good?
Because it provides the consumer with protection should the original company go out of business, or choose not to continue the product. Imagine if there were no IBM clones, but IBM had become popular. What if, somehow, IBM suddenly went out of business? Ohoh... now there's trouble. But, now with clones abounding, the world won't come to a standstill today if IBM dives.
Also, for example, those of us who still use Nintendo (original) (like me) like the fact that clones are avaliable since Nintendo has dumped this console. See how the world benefits from this? When my Nintendo original sets on fire, I can buy a clone, and still legally use my cartridges.
And, amazingly, it benefits the original company. What happens if/when Apple goes out business? Yes, you Macintosh users, you are ROYALLY screwed. You can join the Amiga lot looking in garage sales for parts.
>Now either BOTH activities must be evil or they must BOTH be allowed
No. One is illegal, and bad. The other legal, and good.
Verbatim copying is illegal because you add nothing of value. Making _similar_, _compatible_ things is not, because you add the value of protection to the consumer. Why? Because a reverse-engineered copy proves you understand how the original works. You can therefore improve upon it. A verbatim copy shows you have no understanding of the device/software, and therefore cannot sustain the life of the device.
Oh, here's another few examples of copied, but NOT pirated software: Freedos. Linux. DR-DOS. OpenDOS.
Freedos and DR-DOS and OpenDOS are compatible with MS-DOS (reverse engineered). Would you tell me that Freedos, DR-DOS, and OpenDOS add no value to MS-DOS whatsoever?
Would you tell me that Linux adds no value to Unix whatsoever?
The fact is, the law, and morals in general, are designed to protect the citizens as a group, and not some single company. It's a free market. If your company can't stand some legal competition, then pack up and go.
>Slackware uses SysV init binaries, but the actual init scripts are more BSD-like.
:-)
Ok... I can deal with that. Who wouldn't want the best of both worlds? Simple BSD init scripts with SysV binaries... sounds OK with me.
Of course what the end user sees is probably more like BSD (although I can't say... I really do need to try it out sometime).
>Well you may or may not have noticed that I am not, in fact, the "real" Bruce Perens. I suspect that I have been bitchslapped by the staff.
;-)
If that is the reason why, that is DAMN STUPID. I'd bet you'd find 100's of Bruce Perens in Australia. I don't know your real name, but what I can tell you is that names aren't OWNED. I don't OWN my name. I happen to use it. I do own my Social Security Number, because it IS unique. Names really just aren't.
>although I think that would normally put my posts at 0 by default.
IIRC too, that is what should happen. The "bitchslapping" (-1 perma score) is one of those less advertised features (since it is a blatant attempt at censorship).
>I suspect that I have been bitchslapped by the staff. I sent an email to Rob Malda, and we'll see if that's the case.
I wouldn't bother -- I've attempted moderation discussions with him too. He's tight as a clam. Won't even reply with a "thanks for mailing me, but I was too bust to read your mail. it was forwarded to blah blah blah." type of message. It's to be expected from a company president.
Talk to Andover.net see what they have to say about it.
No way man! Real geeks use CP/M!
(And if slashdot wasn't so goddamn broken I wouldn't have to resubmit this OVER AND OVER AGAIN until their goddamn post timer runs out. You have to type two or three comments at once because you have to keep waiting for the ERRORS to be transmitted so you can REPOST AGAIN AND AGAIN until slashdot isn't broken for a minute.)
..because you missed it in your sentence. You may also need to replace your comma with a semi-colon when you add this very necessary word in. The word such could also be used in place of what, if you prefer.
"You seem very fond of the word 'definitely,' what a pity you can't spell it correctly."
BTW: I am sorry if this is posted twice. I get "buffer socket errors" from slashdot lately. Is something else broken?
The low down of the init directory structure for slackware (and I've never used no BSD... but I do LOVE Slackware's CLEAR and CONSICE way of initializing the system):
/etc/rc.d: :-)
/etc/rc.d include:
/etc/rc.d/rc3.d/ (for runlevel 3) instead of starting them from /etc/rc.d/rc.M. This makes for a lot more init scripts, and a more complicated execution path to follow through if something goes wrong. For this reason, Slackware has always used the traditional BSD style init script layout."
:-)
Inside
rc.0 (linked to rc.6) -- Run level 0/6 (computer is rebooted)
rc.4 -- Run level 4. For XDM.
rc.K -- Run level 1. Single user mode.
rc.M -- Run level "multiuser". Guess...
rc.S -- System initialization script. Run at boot time.
less important (but still necessary) files in
rc.cdrom -- Makes the CDROM automount at boot.
rc.inet1 -- Starts up base INET system.
rc.inet2 -- "This shell script boots up the entire INET system."
Slackware uses the BSD system (according to slackware themselves). This is pulled from rc.sysvinit (the basic sysv compatibility script):
"rc.sysvinit: This file provides basic compatibility with SystemV style startup scripts. The SystemV style init system places start/stop scripts for each runlevel into directories such as
Patrick Volkerding doesn't like SysV init. So no, I have a feeling there is NO similarity between slackware init and SysV init (to quell the previous argument too). And Patrick Volkerding HIMSELF says "Slackware has always used the traditional BSD style init script layout".
There you have it. Slackware == BSD init. I like it.
>they just develop the ability to tune it out, much like they have developed the ability to tune out violence, hunger, suffering etc.
>It's so much easier that way, isn't it?
They wouldn't put it on TV if they didn't want people to tune it out, now would they?
That was worth a karma point.
Another fun commodore trick: Turn the sound up to full volume while loading something from disk... You can HEAR the slowness of the serial bus! :-)
And yes, Commodore made some of the lowest build quality computers ever (but when they worked, they worked well). I blew up three power bricks and two boards in 10 years. I still see PCjrs that work, for comparison.
Of course, to Commodore's tribute, their later model machines improved quality very much. My C64C [white on white] still goes, along with the 1541, 1702, and SGfxjr. (that's diskdrive, monitor, and printer adaptor to the uninatiated)
Think of it like this -- most of those power supplies are made in China. They are made as cheap as possible. Especially some of the non CSA/UL approved ones. The fan is 1/3 of the cost of the PSU. Why is it there? Fffffffffffftttt.... SSsssssssssssssttt... BAM!!! SMOKE! FIRE!
Just like a car exhaust, choking off the most heat producing component in a computer (the power supply for sure) is like sticking a banana in your muffler. REALLY bad idea.
I've seen the occasional computer with a dead PSU fan that's been on overnight, and on when I looked at it. When I opened it to replace the PSU, I had to use my clothing to hold on to the the HDD (which has to be moved to get at the PSU). It was that hot. At LEAST 70 degrees Celsius.
I should also note... if you purposely defeat safety things like PSU fans and burn down your house, well... the insurance company isn't likely to help you out.
What drives me insane are the losers that leave their seat in the reclined position during MEALS. For Gods sake, give me some peace -- the airplane is already a meat locker in the cheap section...
:-)
Yeah, I know with MOST airlines people are _required_ to keep their seats up during meals. Not so on Air Canada. Reminder to self: Ask about the rules before laying out the cash.
>Yeah, just like, say, Linux and Windows.
Bingo. If you have only a one man staff for over 100 people that is... In that case:
Windows 9x: $250 gets you an OS in a box. Hope you like it. Supporting it costs very little because you can do very little with it. Like "A meal in a can" it's server capabilities are laudable only as an example not to follow -- don't pack so much crap into something that is already bursting at the seams.
Windows NT/2k: $$$$$ gets you an OS in a paper sleeve. It doesn't matter wether you like it or not because once the managers see it you are stuck with it. Supporting it costs very much because you can't do anything with it properly. Takes about 1 server for like 10 clients. Sorta like duct tape when it is used on anything but ducts.
Linux: No money gets you an OS on an FTP site. For one man, supporting that many users is going to cost extreme $$$$$$. But you can do it all on one machine. Just like a big swiss army knife.
Of course, a smart company (too bad these don't exist) would hire 5 people (one per 20), run Linux, and buy X-Terms. This is cheaper than ANY of the Windows solutions I have ever seen...
Just my $0.02
>Besides, isn't half of the point of having a cell phone making sure that you can be found?
Not to me. The point of having any type of wireless communications device (to me) is that I can be _reached_ anywhere. That doesn't mean I want anyone and their brother to know my location. It just means I want to be able to communicate with them. Isn't this the same point as the idea of internet communications? You can be where you want, when you want, and can still communicate with others.
>except for all the GOTO statement limbo
;-)
Qbasic (free with DOS/Win 95+) or QuickBasic ($$$) fixes that. I think it makes a great beginner language, because you can make a half decent program quickly, with just enough code, and it is still readable -- if you take advantage of the sub/function statements. And it comes with games for the kids to play too...
I'll risk a point to say this: The Trident 8900, while dead slow, is supported so well, it is nearly unbelieveable nowadays. Even a few DOS games had support directly for it, and the setup disks had enough Trident 8900 specific customizations that it puts any other card (including my G200) to shame.
So why was the above post (-1, redundant)?
>It uses 1600 WATTS
:-)
Time for us 15A/120V users to get 220V service... or more circuits. You aren't supposed to load a 15A line more than 1850 watts. Computer supply: 300W + 1600 watts = too much.
>Linux would have to decide whether it wants to be on desktop or on the Server side.
:-)
...the amount of desktop apps it has
...and also the amount of games that has been released for it
:-)
You have Linux (the kernel) and Linux Distribution (most everything else) confused. The linux kernel simply gives software easy access to the hardware (among other tasks). Currently distributions like RedHat and Mandrake focus on the desktop/ease of use market (IMHO), and distributions like Slackware focus on the server market (again, IMHO).
Of course, there isn't any reason why someone can't invent "desktop Linux". I suppose that _was_ what LinuxOne had in mind...
>Windows is a clear winner on the Desktop for its Ease of use
Your opinion, not mine. Show a little proof from a reputable source (no, this doesn't include any ZD publications), and this point will make sense.
>Windows is a clear winner on...
Again, your opinion, not mine. Personally, I have found Linux can do more for me desktopwise than Windows -- and at a price I can afford. What can you do in Windows that cannot be done (perhaps in a different way) in Linux?
>Windows...
This I agree with. There are many more games for windows than there are for Linux. Of course, I think that console systems are best suited to games. Nowadays you save money by buying a console over an uberfast computer, and end up with a games machine that is faster and better suited to the task. So, if you want to buy $1000 worth of Linux computer and a $300 game console, you now have the same gaming capabilities (and game availability) of the $2000 windows game computer.
>Linux is powerful for its robustness on the Server side.
Thanks...
>I dont mind a desktop that crashes twice a day
How many people would say that about any other home electronics/appliances. "Hey hon, the fridge crashed again." "Just push the reboot button". Personally, any crashes are unacceptable to me. They lead to data loss, and time wasted. Two things that royally p*ss me off, and most certainly make the boss mad (fortunately, not at me).
>But I dont want a stable OS to run on my desktop with no games to be played.
Buy a console and a BT848 TV capture card. A lot of people won't even realize it isn't being played on the computer and the games aren't any less fun.
>I made something. I invented it. I can do with it whatever I want to, and can direct my descendants to do with it whatever they want to.
A) Lets say, hypothetically, I made a car. I decide that only people in my family can drive it. I write that into my will. Now, the person inheriting that car doesn't like that idea. They want EVERYONE to enjoy the car. So they let your will default (ie: They don't collect the car). Guess what... Now the GOVERNMENT owns the car and can do what the hell they like with it. So directing your descendants to do what you want them to do just won't work.
B) If you don't like copyright, that's fine. Either run for Prime Minister/President on the platform of your choice, or rescind your citizenship and buy an island. As long as you live in a country that recognises copyright (isn't that all of them?) then you HAVE to abide by the rules of the land. This is in the same vein as wanting to do drugs. If that isn't allowed where you are, then you have to rescind your citizenship and live somewhere where it is legal. The comforts of the land are ONLY provided for people who obey the laws. Part of that is Copyright.
C) If the people want copyright to be 10 years, and someone is elected to do that, then tough nuggies. The majority of people want it that way, and they don't care about your minority ideals. You can still do (B).
>"oh it's not yours anymore, it's in the public domain. Give it to me."
Like I say, if you don't like the laws, change them or move. Your choice. Because right now, in most countries, this is the way it is.
>Why?
:-) should be getting money for nothing?
The Act of Copyright exists to allow people to purchase authentic works. It has been mutated today into an act that allows publishers to make money from their art (which I haven't any problem with). The idea of copyrights expiring means that once the company has milked an idea for what it is reasonably worth (and trust me, Super Mario Brothers ain't worth even $5 anymore, I bought mine for $2!), the copyright would expire and allow anyone, including the poor, access to the works.
Why should we all have access to copywritten works, some might ask? The answer is simple: To preserve education and history. If copyrights take 100 years to expire right now, then ALL companies have to do to cover their mistakes is not release their stuff for the 100 years. There aren't many formats out there that will last 100 years. CDs get laser rot (if they are built poorly... they have to be built DAMN good to last 100 years), the magnetism of disks changes, film rots, arcade machines break, contacts on ROM cartridges wear out, etc.
If a company can cover their mistakes through copyright, they can rewrite their history. Sounds scary, no?
If copyright expires at the end of the useful selling period of an item, then the last few sold are still in good shape, and soon copies would exist (legally) ensuring that history is served. There is NO reason why a company needs to keep copyrights on computer games longer than 10 years, IMHO. Tell me ONE company that is still burning ROMS for new Nintendo cartridges of a 10 year old game. If you can't, you likely won't find a company doing it for any other system -- Nintendo was pretty much the most popular console 10 years ago.
>How is a book that was written 50 years ago any less relevant today than when it was first published?
How relevant a work is doesn't mean it deserves to enjoy an infinite copyright. Hell, the works of Plato are still relevant -- do you really think that whoever is still part of Plato's bloodline (probably a few million people now...
A Chilton's manual for a 1990 Tempo might be useful to someone trying to restore on 50 years from now (therefore relevant). Obviously it isn't going to be in print. And how many people have a preserved Chilton's collection? Should the knowledge of how to repair that car be simply lost? If you ask me, no. Releasing copyright after the reasonably saleable lifetime of the material would allow someone to copy the information. This means that 50 years from now, there could be a full older Chilton's manual collection, simply because if you combine what each Mechanic has, you will probably find a full set. But copying these old books to make a complete set for yourself would be illegal right now. That is just plain wrong, unless you are a masochist and WANT others to spend ungodly amounts of time talking to hundreds of mechanics to get one damn book.
But, at least for Chiltons manuals, you MIGHT have a chance at finding them in a library. Not so for most all computer software. Now THIS is where the real problem is: Libraries need to start carrying computer games for historical and archival purposes, using OUR money. Or copyright has to be diminshed, costing almost nothing. I like the last option.
>There exists VCRs with more than one playback mechanism (GO brand, for example) not to mention commercial tape servers that can access and sort through hundreds of cassettes.
/w robot, but hey, again, IANAL.
:-)
But only one person can use the VCR at a time. Or at least that is the intended design.
>Again, this is a minor quibble over symantecs.
That minor quibble over symantecs means a LOT to the government. Mazda (I think it was Mazda) was able to import their "trucks" because they were classified as cars (they shared the same doors as one of their cars). This reduced their import taxes significantly. Symantecs will work both ways. Chances are you'd be needing to have a giant tape server
Another, more recent example of symantecs meaning everything is the Rio device. The RIAA attempted to prevent it because they said it was a "home entertainment device" (or something similar). Diamond was able to get away with selling it because according to the law it isn't an MP3 player, it is a computer peripheral...
>Not true. Taping for later viewing is considered fair use (dealyed viewing). Strictly speaking you have to erase the tape after you watch it.
Ok. I just found that out (as did, I'm sure, most of the other slashdot users). The ruling was 16 years ago...
And it doesn't apply to RecordTV because they are commercial/for-profit. The law excludes people in that situation from benefiting from it.
Ok, so I find out just now that in 1984 a law was passed allowing one-time non-commercial recording of TV shows in the US. So, you are allowed to record Murder She Wrote, IF you watch it once and erase it.
:-)
Still, you are not allowed to keep it, and doing so would violate various laws.
This really doesn't give you the legal freedom you'd need to run RecordTV, or to do most anything useful with your VCR (ie: Record movies from Pay-Per-View).
Ah well, you learn something everyday.
I'm still not sure if taping copy protected shows is allowed (ie: Scrambled cable channels). We'll see...
>then we can all record our movies in peace once again
Since most people tape movies from TV for keeps, I think you'd still be violating laws.
The problem with commiting a crime on the internet is that unlike giving away copies of stuff to freinds and family, you are giving it away to many MILLIONS of people. So a small crime becomes a huge crime as fast as your T1 can overflow with connections...
>I suppose some other new technology will appear for people to hate and fear soon enough
I'm working on it -- I'll trade you my prototype for a piece of new technology that people love and enjoy.