Being unfamiliar with the Ipod, I'll throw this one up...
Does the iPod have any kind of copyright protection mechanism whatsoever? If so, and this product can bypass it, then it's in the same position as decss, right?
I can't comment on stand-alone dvd players, but most PC dvd drives have uploadable firmware that will make then region-free. IIRC though, you still have to use a software program like decss to decrypt them.
Open software is typically accompanied by open support. If the usage of your software is as secret as you make it sound, it might be really difficult to get technical support from the community in the same way civillian users might.
I finally got Linux 2.4.CLASSIFIED to work on my CLASSIFIED system, which required me to work around the CLASSIFIED component attached to the CLASSIFIED-CLASSIFIED. However, I'm still having some stability problems. Anybody see anything blatently wrong with this patch? :
---/usr/local/src/linux/fs/devices.c Sat Sep 22 21:35:43 2001
+++ CLASSIFIED.c Sat Mar 16 14:32:35 2002
@@ -32,7 +32,7 @@
And already, the OSDN has played with the usage and privacy policies at sourceforge enough that the GNU project has taken an old snap shot of sourceforge and opened their own alternative, Savannah. As much as I've enjoyed using Slashdot, I can't help but worry that down the road we may see more of the same issues cropping up here. Hopefully not, hopefully the use of a subscription system to bring in revenue will avoid the need to resort to anything more draconian.
Sony Corp., for example, had complained to the government that the provision "would diminish Sony's ability to assert its patents... and thereby may enable Microsoft to expand its power into new areas."
Microsoft described those complaints as "a great deal of misunderstanding and wild charges that Microsoft would use the right to misappropriate the intellectual property of others."
"Well, sure the settlement would give us the right to misappropriate the intellectual property of others. But we're genuinely insulted that anyone would suggest we would use that right..."
Well, of course it's complex... chaotic in fact. But that's the point. Any little thing that we go actively manipulating has the potential to come back and bite us, (or help us). More importantly, it's virtually impossible to predict what kind of effects we're going to create.
As for my case personally... I was actually never really healthy has a child... asthma... odd diet... Osgood-Schlatter's Disease (a condition causing inflammation and pain in the knee, especially while exercising) for a while. My physical failings were definately out of my hands. More then that though, I still consider getting glasses in grade 4 to be one of the biggest milestones in my life. It changed the way other children perceived me, fairly or not. Learning at that age that people are, by their nature, occasionally fickle and superficial had an immediate impact on my outlook on getting along with others. A few (not entirely enjoyable) years later and I was able to approach social situations without a serious fear of what kind of repercussions my actions would have on the rest of my life. I could take risks, and ended up with some very strong friendships that I still value today. Looking back, I can honestly say that I'm very glad my parents & the time's technology never made contact lenses or laser eye surgery an option, let alone genetic solutions.
Furthermore... weaknesses are one of the things that define us. If I was more physically adept, for example, I would have certainly been more likely to have focused on that element of my life as a child. Instead, I found that I, socially, was very different from the people around me. That forced me to seek out and use my other strengths, and make them a more important part of who I am. I sought out different peer groups, different friends. My family's different because I'm different...
I think when you really consider it, our weaknesses are as much a contributing factor in who we are and who we will be as our strengths. And I believe any attempt to fiddle with that is going to be detrimental, both to individuals, and to the society they go on to live in.
Re:How Are the Changes Being Made?
on
AOL vs. Trillian
·
· Score: 3, Informative
I believe that this is how Jabber was stopped in the end.
Incorrect. The current jabber AIM-transport works on the basis of the server operators putting the AIM binaries somewhere the transport can see it. It then calculates checksums off ot that.
AOL has been blocking AIM and ICQ traffic from jabber servers simply by blocking their IP's.
"We don't change the pitch, you cannot detect that the images aren't there. You see everything, you hear everything, just in a shorter period of time."
- Bill Hendershot of Prime Image
s/pitch/plot/
s/images/scenes/
s/hear/read/
s/period of time/number of words/
Is it just me, or does that start to sound alot like Coles Notes?
First, let me say that what the poster is suggesting sounds a little more sophisticated then a simple re-implementation of XP's hibernate function, although functionality like that under UNIX would certainly be invaluable. It sounds like the poster wants control over individual processes, something that I consider far more interesting.
What's said here is certainly very reasonable. But the extensions of whats being suggested are even more fantastic. Once a process is completely removed from memory, with file handles and storage and status all kept away safely, is there any reason that the process is really tied to that computer? Why wouldn't it be possible to take that 'frozen' process, transfer it to another machine with access to the same filesystem on some level (some translation of file handles would likely be neccesary), and thaw it there, allowing someone to move a running process to another machine? Need to replace your web server's only CPU, but don't want downtime? Move the process to a backup machine, replace the original's hardware, and move the process back.
I even thought I had heard that someone was working on just such a project, or at least thinking about the details of implementing it. (I'm just getting started in learning UNIX internals myself). Anybody have more references to information on this sort of thing?
We rely... technology (most crackers don't have access to a huge radio antenna with which to transmit)
I don't personally, but one of the many research institutions working through my University has one on a roof of a building on campus. A little wall scaling to bypass a locked door, and I could be playing around with it to my heart's content in a matter of minutes.
They revamped the Airport completely
now it looks just like a nightclub,
Everyone's excited and confused.
Baby, check this out I've got something to say,
Man it's so loud in here!
When they start the love machine and I can love again,
I'll remember what it was.
No, but you can still use all the content that your web browser has cached. And if you download a game demo on your high-speed connection, they don't make you relinquish the demo when your connection is over.
If you ever get the chance to see the episode of TWL that starred Ben Stein (Host of game show 'Win Ben Stein's Money'), you might just be surprised.
TWL's host said something to the affect of "Well, Ben, you're supposed to be quite smart at trivia on your own show, but you're playing a very average game today."
Ben Stein mockingly mumbled whines perfect in time with her syllables, and while she covered her face, I swear she was cracking up underneath.
Ah, but is there really a market for IE as a seperate product? With most browsers being free these days, it's not likely that it could survive as a commercial product. The only option left there is to turn it's source over the the community, and given how clueless the courts are regarding technical matters, I really don't believe they'd even begin to consider this.
Although, now that I think of it, MSN's lack of their own browser would really be in the best interests of everyone, because it would force them to provide services in a standard way, to get as many potential customers as possible.
Also, I'd have my doubts about how practical IE development would be independant of Windows. In retrospect, perhaps the best option is to ban use of IE.;)
How is X-box and Msn currently being owned by MS breaking the law or causing anti-competitive behavior in the desktop operating system market?
At least in the case of MSN, it's a prime example of Microsoft's attempt to expand it's monopoly into unrelated industries.
1) They include Internet Explorer in Windows
2) They force OEM's to not remove it.
3) They force OEM's to not make it less obvious in the desktop
4) They actively attempt to dump their product into the market in such a way as to elminate competition
5) They fake evidince in court to give the idea that removing it is somehow destructive
6) They push MSN at every possible corner in Windows XP in an attempt to improve their ISP services' market share.
I also feel that as MSN is split from MS, Internet explorer should go with it. If left with MSN, it improves the share of other browsers in the Windows market, other browsers that support non-standard platforms. That would force MSN to consider porting Internet Explorer to other platforms as well.
I'm going to have to disagree on the "lack of package management holds it back" argument.
Current package management systems in use (rpm, deb, etc.) rely heavily on the package maintainers. You're trusting them on several issues that seem kind of hairy in a large production environment.
1) The binary package does what it's supposed to (read: trojan free)
2) The software within was compiled to an architecture that you can handle (Nothing like finding -i386 meant to your package maintainer that 686 optimizations were included (not so good on some chips, like the AMD k6-2's))
3) Everything was built with reasonable options
It seems to me that all these problems are solved by debian's source package scheme. (Ie, apt-get source package; cd package; review & edit source and build scripts to your liking; dpkg-buildpackage) Yes, the maintainers could potentially throw in trojans, (although package signing prevents anyone else from doing this), or just get lazy and make mistakes in the packaging. But most of those mistakes can and should be caught by the package management system, and provide the user enough flexibility to correct the problem. (I know.deb's do.) And being able to see the source code readily means that source deb's are just as safe as source tgz's.
4) The package plays nice and doesn't replace files from other packages on your system.
Isn't this really one of the basic reasons to have a package management system? When you do a 'make install', you're blindly telling the installation scripts to install themselves. I know in my experience I've had more then a few cases of 'make install' causing chaos, whereas any package management system worth its salt will point out these conflicts and give me the option to specify more precisely what should be done, or simply back out and cancel the installation.
The article says quite plainly that they do not know how much it going to be. There's your answer.
With regards to the larger ads finding their way into our happy lives, I have to say that I'm gravely disappointed. If Slashdot's viewership is growing as the article says, shouldn't that mean more views and click-throughs? Doesn't it make Slashdot a higher-profile site, capable of charging more money for each view and click-through?
I have no problem with a single ad at the top of the page. But I do worry that the Slashdot crew are underestimating the number of viewers that may use increasing ads as a perfectly good excuse to start using ad-filtering proxies like Junkbuster, (a GPL proxy available as source for *nix, or binaries for Win32 platforms).
Slashdot Mirror
To take it to the next level, what exactly would get included in a fair-use ammendment to the constitution?
Being unfamiliar with the Ipod, I'll throw this one up...
Does the iPod have any kind of copyright protection mechanism whatsoever? If so, and this product can bypass it, then it's in the same position as decss, right?
I can't comment on stand-alone dvd players, but most PC dvd drives have uploadable firmware that will make then region-free. IIRC though, you still have to use a software program like decss to decrypt them.
This does not however prevent them from being punished for perjuring themselves during the case, does it?
And already, the OSDN has played with the usage and privacy policies at sourceforge enough that the GNU project has taken an old snap shot of sourceforge and opened their own alternative, Savannah. As much as I've enjoyed using Slashdot, I can't help but worry that down the road we may see more of the same issues cropping up here. Hopefully not, hopefully the use of a subscription system to bring in revenue will avoid the need to resort to anything more draconian.
"Well, sure the settlement would give us the right to misappropriate the intellectual property of others. But we're genuinely insulted that anyone would suggest we would use that right..."
Well, of course it's complex... chaotic in fact. But that's the point. Any little thing that we go actively manipulating has the potential to come back and bite us, (or help us). More importantly, it's virtually impossible to predict what kind of effects we're going to create.
As for my case personally... I was actually never really healthy has a child... asthma... odd diet... Osgood-Schlatter's Disease (a condition causing inflammation and pain in the knee, especially while exercising) for a while. My physical failings were definately out of my hands. More then that though, I still consider getting glasses in grade 4 to be one of the biggest milestones in my life. It changed the way other children perceived me, fairly or not. Learning at that age that people are, by their nature, occasionally fickle and superficial had an immediate impact on my outlook on getting along with others. A few (not entirely enjoyable) years later and I was able to approach social situations without a serious fear of what kind of repercussions my actions would have on the rest of my life. I could take risks, and ended up with some very strong friendships that I still value today. Looking back, I can honestly say that I'm very glad my parents & the time's technology never made contact lenses or laser eye surgery an option, let alone genetic solutions.
I think when you really consider it, our weaknesses are as much a contributing factor in who we are and who we will be as our strengths. And I believe any attempt to fiddle with that is going to be detrimental, both to individuals, and to the society they go on to live in.
Incorrect. The current jabber AIM-transport works on the basis of the server operators putting the AIM binaries somewhere the transport can see it. It then calculates checksums off ot that.
AOL has been blocking AIM and ICQ traffic from jabber servers simply by blocking their IP's.
s/images/scenes/
s/hear/read/
s/period of time/number of words/
Is it just me, or does that start to sound alot like Coles Notes?
First, let me say that what the poster is suggesting sounds a little more sophisticated then a simple re-implementation of XP's hibernate function, although functionality like that under UNIX would certainly be invaluable. It sounds like the poster wants control over individual processes, something that I consider far more interesting.
What's said here is certainly very reasonable. But the extensions of whats being suggested are even more fantastic. Once a process is completely removed from memory, with file handles and storage and status all kept away safely, is there any reason that the process is really tied to that computer? Why wouldn't it be possible to take that 'frozen' process, transfer it to another machine with access to the same filesystem on some level (some translation of file handles would likely be neccesary), and thaw it there, allowing someone to move a running process to another machine? Need to replace your web server's only CPU, but don't want downtime? Move the process to a backup machine, replace the original's hardware, and move the process back.
I even thought I had heard that someone was working on just such a project, or at least thinking about the details of implementing it. (I'm just getting started in learning UNIX internals myself). Anybody have more references to information on this sort of thing?
This is not the first shot. The corporate war started a long time ago.
This is just the first tactical nuke.
Tell that to the RIAA/SDMI.
For HL mods at lan parties, I'm a big fan of Science and Industry. Lots of fun there, plus it has just the right ridiculous sillyness to it. :)
Heretic II is also excellent with a good local group.
They Might Be Giants - Man it's so Loud in Here
No, but you can still use all the content that your web browser has cached. And if you download a game demo on your high-speed connection, they don't make you relinquish the demo when your connection is over.
If you subscribe to a magazine, you don't lose all your back issues when your subscription terminates.
If you ever get the chance to see the episode of TWL that starred Ben Stein (Host of game show 'Win Ben Stein's Money'), you might just be surprised.
TWL's host said something to the affect of "Well, Ben, you're supposed to be quite smart at trivia on your own show, but you're playing a very average game today."
Ben Stein mockingly mumbled whines perfect in time with her syllables, and while she covered her face, I swear she was cracking up underneath.
Britney Spears. Both intellectually and physically. (See Britney's Guide to Semiconductor Physics)
Ah, but is there really a market for IE as a seperate product? With most browsers being free these days, it's not likely that it could survive as a commercial product. The only option left there is to turn it's source over the the community, and given how clueless the courts are regarding technical matters, I really don't believe they'd even begin to consider this.
;)
Although, now that I think of it, MSN's lack of their own browser would really be in the best interests of everyone, because it would force them to provide services in a standard way, to get as many potential customers as possible.
Also, I'd have my doubts about how practical IE development would be independant of Windows. In retrospect, perhaps the best option is to ban use of IE.
At least in the case of MSN, it's a prime example of Microsoft's attempt to expand it's monopoly into unrelated industries.
1) They include Internet Explorer in Windows
2) They force OEM's to not remove it.
3) They force OEM's to not make it less obvious in the desktop
4) They actively attempt to dump their product into the market in such a way as to elminate competition
5) They fake evidince in court to give the idea that removing it is somehow destructive
6) They push MSN at every possible corner in Windows XP in an attempt to improve their ISP services' market share.
I also feel that as MSN is split from MS, Internet explorer should go with it. If left with MSN, it improves the share of other browsers in the Windows market, other browsers that support non-standard platforms. That would force MSN to consider porting Internet Explorer to other platforms as well.
It seems to me that all these problems are solved by debian's source package scheme. (Ie, apt-get source package; cd package; review & edit source and build scripts to your liking; dpkg-buildpackage) Yes, the maintainers could potentially throw in trojans, (although package signing prevents anyone else from doing this), or just get lazy and make mistakes in the packaging. But most of those mistakes can and should be caught by the package management system, and provide the user enough flexibility to correct the problem. (I know
Isn't this really one of the basic reasons to have a package management system? When you do a 'make install', you're blindly telling the installation scripts to install themselves. I know in my experience I've had more then a few cases of 'make install' causing chaos, whereas any package management system worth its salt will point out these conflicts and give me the option to specify more precisely what should be done, or simply back out and cancel the installation.
The article says quite plainly that they do not know how much it going to be. There's your answer.
With regards to the larger ads finding their way into our happy lives, I have to say that I'm gravely disappointed. If Slashdot's viewership is growing as the article says, shouldn't that mean more views and click-throughs? Doesn't it make Slashdot a higher-profile site, capable of charging more money for each view and click-through?
I have no problem with a single ad at the top of the page. But I do worry that the Slashdot crew are underestimating the number of viewers that may use increasing ads as a perfectly good excuse to start using ad-filtering proxies like Junkbuster, (a GPL proxy available as source for *nix, or binaries for Win32 platforms).