A new method of distributed computing, sideband computing, that is global, scalable and
can utilize many idle CPU resources worldwide. Sideband is defined as when a user connects to
some (normal) network services, a separate communication channel is opened, through which a
server distributes its tasks to all the clients and collects the results later. By this method,
any network server which has a lot of clients can compute very large parallel computing problems
by dividing it into small individual parts and have them calculated by its clients. With little
cost, the network server can act as a supercomputer.
It is laying out a way to distribute parallel processing tasks to a large number of clients, which SETI@Home thought up a full two years prior. The only argument I can see is they seem to be saying they can do this discreetly while the client is using some other service? I don't have time to go and pick through the entire patent right now, but it seems that this nonsense has gone beyond simply being out of hand.
If you clicked on the link, they already attempt to do this via their "Active Sites" which shows Microsoft with a 0.92% gain over the same period. You can read more about how they determine an active site here:
WARNING: Clicking the above link will crash firefox. It will do nothing else. The hyphens are not normal minus hyphen (the - symbol on your american keyboard will translate to 0x2d) but a soft hyphen (0xad).
This project is quite interesting, to say the least, but I found it even more interesting that they are writing it in Object Pascal:
11. What language is PETROS® written in?
PETROS® is written using an in-house Object Pascal compiler. This enables us to generate machine code with roughly the same efficiency as C or C++, but with very strict type checking. The language is compatible with Borland Delphi Pascal allowing code to be interchanged with many of the existing applications that Trumpet has developed to date.
Also, they aren't planning on opening the code to everyone, so I'm not sure what incentive anyone would have to purchase this OS over a true MS one which it is trying to duplicate. Oh well, my $0.02.
Unjust laws exist: shall we be content to obey them, or shall we endeavor to amend them, and obey them until we have succeeded, or shall we transgress them at once? Men, generally, under such a government as this, think that they ought to wait until they have persuaded the majority to alter them. They think that, if they should resist, the remedy would be worse than the evil. But it is the fault of the government itself that the remedy is worse than the evil. It makes it worse. Why is it not more apt to anticipate and provide for reform? Why does it not cherish its wise minority? Why does it cry and resist before it is hurt? Why does it not encourage its citizens to put out its faults, and do better than it would have them? Why does it always crucify Christ and excommunicate Copernicus and Luther, and pronounce Washington and Franklin rebels?
First of all, I'd like to look over what they are asking them to do:
destroy the kIllustrator-package
Well, we all know that with respect to the GPL and the people who already possesses the code to KIllustrator, this is like asking the seas not to break.
name every KIllustrator user
And because of the distribution medium, we also know that there is probably no chance of fulfilling this requirement.
disclose the profit they made from it
And we all obviously know that no profit was made from this software. How much money did you pay for KIllustrator on your desktop? That's what I thought.
The *BOTTOM LINE* is that this man, no matter his position, was working for the good of every user that exists. He was creating and maintaining software for free, to be GIVEN AWAY. He wasn't looking for fame, or for fortune. And yet, I see so many people turn a cheek and say 'Oh, but Adobe's product is called Illustrator, so he should pay anyway.' JESUS H. CHRIST. If there weren't people out there like this good man working to produce great software for people who BELIEVE in what I hope all of the people reading this post do, then the open source movement wouldn't be. OK. Granted, he named his FREE software package similar to a commercial counterpart. Like it is the first time. NO, that isn't an excuse. However, I believe that:
a) Adobe could have handled this in a much nicer fashion. The profits off of the platforms that KIllustrator runs on that adobe COULD be making are exactly *ZERO*. I wish to embed this into people's minds, because it is important. Yes, they have a good reason to keep their options open with their trademark, but at this time, what KIllustrator could take from them is absolutely NOTHING. So why not keep it simple????
b) It's been discusses time and time again, but if you, yourself, use any free software, whether at home or at work, and you agree with adobe and it's lawyers on this, you need to start questioning yourself. All I'm trying to say is that good people and good hackers are the ones that work on projects such as these. Dr. Kai-Uwe Sattler is just the front man for these lawyers, but yet so many people that thrive on so much of the work that people like Dr. Kai-Uwe Sattler do, want to turn a cheek on his temporary misfortune in his case. I'm not even saying that this is the first time, because it's not. It happens all too often. He is one of the many GOOD PEOPLE, working in THEIR OWN TIME, for YOUR BENEFIT. For the BENEFIT OF ALL PEOPLE who wish to have the choice. So tell me, when did he become the enemy? I apologize for the rant, but I believe what was said must be said.
Besides, X-Box sounds like it is X-rated. There will be people who will think it is a porno appliance.
And thats a bad thing? It's the first thing that game to my gramp's mind, and he swore on his deathbed that he'd be the first in line to get one. He is a little upset about them focusing on the T&L, but maybe thats just because he isn't much of a legs guy.
So maybe the name wasn't such a bad decision after all?
What everyone is failing to realize is that TiVO spends a lot of time in developing this software. Now, they are assuming that the users that aren't paying for the subscription also aren't using their network and bandwidth to dial into. There isn't anything that says once you purchase one of these that you are entitled to free software upgrades for the rest of your life. So why is the damn thing even plugged into your phone line? Without paying you are tying up their phone lines, which costs real money; using their bandwidth, which costs real money; and you are using their servers, which cost real money. All you were entitled to when you purchased the box was what came with it. Anything beyond that is just whipped cream on top. So your getting free software upgrades, which I would assume they would stop for those that aren't paying for the service. Would that make everyone happier? No, now they whine and moan because they don't get the software upgrades for free. Everyone wants something for free, but who can aford to give everything away for free?
Ok. Every now and then I enjoy reading an interesting (albiet ignorant) ZDNet article. But what is this guy talking about?
34 Kbps, the typical speed produced by a dial-up connection (plus or minus 10 Kbps), is a true standard.
Well sure, but it's quickly becoming outdated. With roadrunner in the price range of a dialup account plus an extra phone line, who would want to stick with it?
Nobody today can produce a Web site and not care about the dial-up user. So everything gets designed and optimized for the lowest common denominator: 34K.
And I used to have to still consider people using Netscape Navigator 2.0 when I was designing my web pages. Do I still have to? NO! Because OLDER TECHNOLOGIES ARE BOUND TO BE REPLACED by something faster and better. I still make my pages VIEWABLE with even lynx, but will they get the experience without a better browser or a faster connection? Now, today we still have to consider the dial-up user. Yes. But why would we begin to call it a standard now, right when it is being ready to be replaced?
A couple months ago my Grandmother (still trying to stay ahead of the curve, god bless her heart) called me to discuss this crazy commercial that she saw where she could send movies and stuff to others! I set up a call with roadrunner to her house, they installed it, and she loves it. Ask anyone who has used broadband if they would go back to a dialup. The resounding answer will be no. Whether or not the companies that base their business around it make it (won't even go into their business plans) is another story. Just my $0.02.
Reading through, many people are absolutely correct. As the area of computing continues to 'innovate', those innovation are just more complex answers to the questions at hand. So what you begin to need is someone who has an extremely low-level understanding of the application. Such as, the person or persons that created the application or hardware. Now, we could put these people into tech support to help those that are having problems, but they make more money for the company developing. So, as many have pointed out, the newbies (per say) are given the jobs in tech support with little to no actual knowledge of the workings of the product, just a computer attached to a knowledge base of problems already solved. If that doesn't work, the monkey just yelps and says he'll call you back.
This is one reason I love working with open source software. Have a problem? Get on the mailing list. If you have an actual problem that isn't documented somewhere, there are masses of developers containing vast knowledge itching to help you. Now, this obviously doesn't help the guy that can't figure out why his computer doesn't like his illegal operation (flash to computer illiterate drug smugglers thinking the feds are on to them), but it is a start.
Hah, yeah, and the next step is raids on all the local karaoke bars and arresting anyone that violates their copyright laws by singing their precious songs on stage. Dear GOD, when does the madness END?
IBM has spent a lot of time getting their apps in the door on linux, I just wish now that we have the lotus notes server on linux, we could also get a port of the client as well. The groupware suite is one of the killer apps, and what I notice half of everyone's time is spent in at the office. Notes is already well recognized in the corporate environment, so when can we get it already???
The only incompatability I have ever seen as a problem is those damn winmail.dat attachments. When the hell are we going to be able to get rid of those?
Even better, I think that the scientific community should adopt an editing and peer-review system ala nupedia. Completely open to the public, with all information available and published to the public--isn't that what the research was done for anyway?
The only advantage I see with the way nupedia does it is you have different stages--first, the public peer review, a noted editer and reviewer for that specific topic, and of course the copy-editing cycle. From here, anyone could draw up a good print publication based on the results, and everything would still be completely open to the public as well as academia.
How about this (I'm not positive about the additional rules of the game, so this may not be a viable answer) but here is what should happen -
The three people walk into the room. The first person to notice that the other two are wearing different color hats passes. Then the person to their left looks to the other person and guesses the opposite color hat. If no one passes, someone just blurt out the color of the others hats.
I totally agree with your analysis of the over-exageration of a childs actions.
I live in Orlando, FL, and was listen to the radio the other day while they discussed an EIGHT year old boy who, during lunch, picked up a breaded chicken finger, pointed it at a class mate, and said "Bang, Bang".
Consequentially, the boy was suspended from school for three days.
Now, if this were anything other than a small child being not just ignorant of his actions, but actually commiting them in the name of fun, there would be a problem. So if I see some neighborhood children down the street playing cops and robbers, or cowboys and indians, or any one of those infamous childhood games, I should immediately alert the authorities because they are "possibly" going to actually harm someone from it? I'm sorry, but we've just taken this whole worrisome scenario to another level.
Only problem I see with the placement of an OS such as NT, or even CE in embeded devices is its inherent complexities. TV's and VCR's and Amp's all have some kind of system integrated with them, and there is no quote-unquote standard between all of them, but to change the channel, I'm pretty sure the channel up button will do the trick. The problem I see is, outside of PDA's or other such devices (saw some talk about microchips in toasters, kill me if it actually happens) there is no NEED for such a massive underlieing OS. So again, just the age old debate of which is the right tool for the job.
Revelations 0:0 - The beginning of the end.
I wonder now how many exploits will be tracked through bugtraq and packetstorm for exploits on slot machines.. I can only imagine.. and I still wonder if microsoft will be held responsible for these types of things??
Jimmy hacks into a slot machine when the eyes fall off of him, only to win the jackpot on every machine in the building. The management didn't catch on, because of Microsoft's continuing insistance that "those vulnerabilities are completely theoretical".
We have a peer-to-peer file sharing service, such as napster. Client A is trying to request a file from Client B, however, Client A can't connect to Client B to get the file because Client B is behind a firewall and incoming connections are disallowed. How do we approach this?
Well, the answer thus far is for the Server to tell Client B to connect to Client A and initiate the transfer from their end, but now what if Client A is behind a firewall as well!?!? Well, we have two options, although only one is even partially viable (can actually be accomplished with the TCP protocol definition in place today):
Relaying - this should be painfully obvious. They both already have connections open to the server, so the server requests the file from Client B, then sends it on to Client A. This is obviously a Bad Idea because of the massive amounts of bandwidth you would need to relay all of these file transfers.
Brokering or Splicing of two Client connections - the best example that I can think of to give here is that of a program called FlashFXP. It became a very helpful tool in transfering files from server to server when you were on a dialup, because you could in fact open a transfer from one server to the other without the bandwidth constraints of the dialup connection. However, this only worked because both of the servers you are connected to ALLOW incoming connections, allowing the software to broker the connections in this way.
So the main issue is if neither client in a peer-to-peer connection will allow a connection (because basically, the Napster Client is also a server in that it serves up file requests for MP3's that you have residing on your computer), how can we transfer files between the two? One interesting answer was the TCP over UDP approach, but this would not scale well at all (too much wasted bandwidth, you might want to read the article deeper if you'd like a better understanding), and beyond that, there is no approach to take with TCP (that I or any of those discussing it knew of) to broker a connection, only because of the manditory handshaking that the protocol requires. I hope that helps.
Well, this is apparently going to be asked repeatedly, so I will answer. Yes, the TiVO service uses a TCP/IP service to get it's program guide information. It is a proprietary protocol, where the unit sends in it's ID etc encrypted over the protocol to the tivo service which then verifies that the unit in question has an up to date service agreement and then proceeds to send the program data. They do have an 800 number, however, they also use multiple local dialups to keep costs down, which are basically just POPs in different locations that will allow them to dial up to the internet to get to tivo's servers. Therefore, anyone using the service through broadband will still need to pay the subscription fees to TiVO... until someone figures out how to download it and redistribute it to others over another channel. I hope that explains something:)
Slashdot Mirror
If you clicked on the link, they already attempt to do this via their "Active Sites" which shows Microsoft with a 0.92% gain over the same period. You can read more about how they determine an active site here:
v e
http://survey.netcraft.com/index-200007.html#acti
Take 2 seconds to check out his proof of concept:
t ml
http://www.security-protocols.com/firefox-death.h
WARNING: Clicking the above link will crash firefox. It will do nothing else. The hyphens are not normal minus hyphen (the - symbol on your american keyboard will translate to 0x2d) but a soft hyphen (0xad).
He reminds me of someone, but I'm not sure I can put my finger on exactly who...
Also, they aren't planning on opening the code to everyone, so I'm not sure what incentive anyone would have to purchase this OS over a true MS one which it is trying to duplicate. Oh well, my $0.02.
Revelations 0:0 - The beginning of the end.
Here is a little food for thought.
Unjust laws exist: shall we be content to obey them, or shall we endeavor to amend them, and obey them until we have succeeded, or shall we transgress them at once? Men, generally, under such a government as this, think that they ought to wait until they have persuaded the majority to alter them. They think that, if they should resist, the remedy would be worse than the evil. But it is the fault of the government itself that the remedy is worse than the evil. It makes it worse. Why is it not more apt to anticipate and provide for reform? Why does it not cherish its wise minority? Why does it cry and resist before it is hurt? Why does it not encourage its citizens to put out its faults, and do better than it would have them? Why does it always crucify Christ and excommunicate Copernicus and Luther, and pronounce Washington and Franklin rebels?
-Henry David Thoreau, 'Civil Disobedience'
First of all, I'd like to look over what they are asking them to do:
destroy the kIllustrator-package
Well, we all know that with respect to the GPL and the people who already possesses the code to KIllustrator, this is like asking the seas not to break.
name every KIllustrator user
And because of the distribution medium, we also know that there is probably no chance of fulfilling this requirement.
disclose the profit they made from it
And we all obviously know that no profit was made from this software. How much money did you pay for KIllustrator on your desktop? That's what I thought.
The *BOTTOM LINE* is that this man, no matter his position, was working for the good of every user that exists. He was creating and maintaining software for free, to be GIVEN AWAY. He wasn't looking for fame, or for fortune. And yet, I see so many people turn a cheek and say 'Oh, but Adobe's product is called Illustrator, so he should pay anyway.' JESUS H. CHRIST. If there weren't people out there like this good man working to produce great software for people who BELIEVE in what I hope all of the people reading this post do, then the open source movement wouldn't be. OK. Granted, he named his FREE software package similar to a commercial counterpart. Like it is the first time. NO, that isn't an excuse. However, I believe that:
a) Adobe could have handled this in a much nicer fashion. The profits off of the platforms that KIllustrator runs on that adobe COULD be making are exactly *ZERO*. I wish to embed this into people's minds, because it is important. Yes, they have a good reason to keep their options open with their trademark, but at this time, what KIllustrator could take from them is absolutely NOTHING. So why not keep it simple????
b) It's been discusses time and time again, but if you, yourself, use any free software, whether at home or at work, and you agree with adobe and it's lawyers on this, you need to start questioning yourself. All I'm trying to say is that good people and good hackers are the ones that work on projects such as these. Dr. Kai-Uwe Sattler is just the front man for these lawyers, but yet so many people that thrive on so much of the work that people like Dr. Kai-Uwe Sattler do, want to turn a cheek on his temporary misfortune in his case. I'm not even saying that this is the first time, because it's not. It happens all too often. He is one of the many GOOD PEOPLE, working in THEIR OWN TIME, for YOUR BENEFIT. For the BENEFIT OF ALL PEOPLE who wish to have the choice. So tell me, when did he become the enemy? I apologize for the rant, but I believe what was said must be said.
Revelations 0:0 - The beginning of the end.
So maybe the name wasn't such a bad decision after all?
Revelations 0:0 - The begining of the end.
What everyone is failing to realize is that TiVO spends a lot of time in developing this software. Now, they are assuming that the users that aren't paying for the subscription also aren't using their network and bandwidth to dial into. There isn't anything that says once you purchase one of these that you are entitled to free software upgrades for the rest of your life. So why is the damn thing even plugged into your phone line? Without paying you are tying up their phone lines, which costs real money; using their bandwidth, which costs real money; and you are using their servers, which cost real money. All you were entitled to when you purchased the box was what came with it. Anything beyond that is just whipped cream on top. So your getting free software upgrades, which I would assume they would stop for those that aren't paying for the service. Would that make everyone happier? No, now they whine and moan because they don't get the software upgrades for free. Everyone wants something for free, but who can aford to give everything away for free?
Revelations 0:0 - The begining of the end.
Ok. Every now and then I enjoy reading an interesting (albiet ignorant) ZDNet article. But what is this guy talking about?
34 Kbps, the typical speed produced by a dial-up connection (plus or minus 10 Kbps), is a true standard.
Well sure, but it's quickly becoming outdated. With roadrunner in the price range of a dialup account plus an extra phone line, who would want to stick with it?
Nobody today can produce a Web site and not care about the dial-up user. So everything gets designed and optimized for the lowest common denominator: 34K.
And I used to have to still consider people using Netscape Navigator 2.0 when I was designing my web pages. Do I still have to? NO! Because OLDER TECHNOLOGIES ARE BOUND TO BE REPLACED by something faster and better. I still make my pages VIEWABLE with even lynx, but will they get the experience without a better browser or a faster connection? Now, today we still have to consider the dial-up user. Yes. But why would we begin to call it a standard now, right when it is being ready to be replaced?
A couple months ago my Grandmother (still trying to stay ahead of the curve, god bless her heart) called me to discuss this crazy commercial that she saw where she could send movies and stuff to others! I set up a call with roadrunner to her house, they installed it, and she loves it. Ask anyone who has used broadband if they would go back to a dialup. The resounding answer will be no. Whether or not the companies that base their business around it make it (won't even go into their business plans) is another story. Just my $0.02.
Revelations 0:0 - The begining of the end.
Definition:
Democracy: Political system where the proletariat periodically chooses which members of the bourgeoisie will exploit them.
Revelations 0:0 - The beginning of the end.
Now all the school children will just have something else to antagonize this poor little kid for:
Mutant mutant,
we made you in a dish...
Revelations 0:0 - The beginning of the end
Reading through, many people are absolutely correct. As the area of computing continues to 'innovate', those innovation are just more complex answers to the questions at hand. So what you begin to need is someone who has an extremely low-level understanding of the application. Such as, the person or persons that created the application or hardware. Now, we could put these people into tech support to help those that are having problems, but they make more money for the company developing. So, as many have pointed out, the newbies (per say) are given the jobs in tech support with little to no actual knowledge of the workings of the product, just a computer attached to a knowledge base of problems already solved. If that doesn't work, the monkey just yelps and says he'll call you back.
This is one reason I love working with open source software. Have a problem? Get on the mailing list. If you have an actual problem that isn't documented somewhere, there are masses of developers containing vast knowledge itching to help you. Now, this obviously doesn't help the guy that can't figure out why his computer doesn't like his illegal operation (flash to computer illiterate drug smugglers thinking the feds are on to them), but it is a start.
Revelations 0:0 - The beginning of the end
Hah, yeah, and the next step is raids on all the local karaoke bars and arresting anyone that violates their copyright laws by singing their precious songs on stage. Dear GOD, when does the madness END?
Revelations 0:0 - The beginning of the end
IBM has spent a lot of time getting their apps in the door on linux, I just wish now that we have the lotus notes server on linux, we could also get a port of the client as well. The groupware suite is one of the killer apps, and what I notice half of everyone's time is spent in at the office. Notes is already well recognized in the corporate environment, so when can we get it already???
Revelations 0:0 - The beginning of the end
The only incompatability I have ever seen as a problem is those damn winmail.dat attachments. When the hell are we going to be able to get rid of those?
Revelations 0:0 - The beginning of the end
Even better, I think that the scientific community should adopt an editing and peer-review system ala nupedia. Completely open to the public, with all information available and published to the public--isn't that what the research was done for anyway?
The only advantage I see with the way nupedia does it is you have different stages--first, the public peer review, a noted editer and reviewer for that specific topic, and of course the copy-editing cycle. From here, anyone could draw up a good print publication based on the results, and everything would still be completely open to the public as well as academia.
Revelations 0:0 - The beginning of the end.
How about this (I'm not positive about the additional rules of the game, so this may not be a viable answer) but here is what should happen -
:)
The three people walk into the room. The first person to notice that the other two are wearing different color hats passes. Then the person to their left looks to the other person and guesses the opposite color hat. If no one passes, someone just blurt out the color of the others hats.
That should get it about every time
Revelations 0:0 - The begining of the end.
I totally agree with your analysis of the over-exageration of a childs actions.
I live in Orlando, FL, and was listen to the radio the other day while they discussed an EIGHT year old boy who, during lunch, picked up a breaded chicken finger, pointed it at a class mate, and said "Bang, Bang".
Consequentially, the boy was suspended from school for three days.
Now, if this were anything other than a small child being not just ignorant of his actions, but actually commiting them in the name of fun, there would be a problem. So if I see some neighborhood children down the street playing cops and robbers, or cowboys and indians, or any one of those infamous childhood games, I should immediately alert the authorities because they are "possibly" going to actually harm someone from it? I'm sorry, but we've just taken this whole worrisome scenario to another level.
Revelations 0:0 - The beginning of the end.
Only problem I see with the placement of an OS such as NT, or even CE in embeded devices is its inherent complexities. TV's and VCR's and Amp's all have some kind of system integrated with them, and there is no quote-unquote standard between all of them, but to change the channel, I'm pretty sure the channel up button will do the trick. The problem I see is, outside of PDA's or other such devices (saw some talk about microchips in toasters, kill me if it actually happens) there is no NEED for such a massive underlieing OS. So again, just the age old debate of which is the right tool for the job. Revelations 0:0 - The beginning of the end.
I wonder now how many exploits will be tracked through bugtraq and packetstorm for exploits on slot machines .. I can only imagine.. and I still wonder if microsoft will be held responsible for these types of things??
Jimmy hacks into a slot machine when the eyes fall off of him, only to win the jackpot on every machine in the building. The management didn't catch on, because of Microsoft's continuing insistance that "those vulnerabilities are completely theoretical".
Revelation 0:0 - The beginning of the end.
Ok, let's start off with the basics.
We have a peer-to-peer file sharing service, such as napster. Client A is trying to request a file from Client B, however, Client A can't connect to Client B to get the file because Client B is behind a firewall and incoming connections are disallowed. How do we approach this?
Well, the answer thus far is for the Server to tell Client B to connect to Client A and initiate the transfer from their end, but now what if Client A is behind a firewall as well!?!? Well, we have two options, although only one is even partially viable (can actually be accomplished with the TCP protocol definition in place today):
Relaying - this should be painfully obvious. They both already have connections open to the server, so the server requests the file from Client B, then sends it on to Client A. This is obviously a Bad Idea because of the massive amounts of bandwidth you would need to relay all of these file transfers.
Brokering or Splicing of two Client connections - the best example that I can think of to give here is that of a program called FlashFXP. It became a very helpful tool in transfering files from server to server when you were on a dialup, because you could in fact open a transfer from one server to the other without the bandwidth constraints of the dialup connection. However, this only worked because both of the servers you are connected to ALLOW incoming connections, allowing the software to broker the connections in this way.
So the main issue is if neither client in a peer-to-peer connection will allow a connection (because basically, the Napster Client is also a server in that it serves up file requests for MP3's that you have residing on your computer), how can we transfer files between the two? One interesting answer was the TCP over UDP approach, but this would not scale well at all (too much wasted bandwidth, you might want to read the article deeper if you'd like a better understanding), and beyond that, there is no approach to take with TCP (that I or any of those discussing it knew of) to broker a connection, only because of the manditory handshaking that the protocol requires. I hope that helps.
Revelations 0:0 - The beginning of the End
Well, this is apparently going to be asked repeatedly, so I will answer. Yes, the TiVO service uses a TCP/IP service to get it's program guide information. It is a proprietary protocol, where the unit sends in it's ID etc encrypted over the protocol to the tivo service which then verifies that the unit in question has an up to date service agreement and then proceeds to send the program data. They do have an 800 number, however, they also use multiple local dialups to keep costs down, which are basically just POPs in different locations that will allow them to dial up to the internet to get to tivo's servers. Therefore, anyone using the service through broadband will still need to pay the subscription fees to TiVO ... until someone figures out how to download it and redistribute it to others over another channel. I hope that explains something :)
Revelations 0:1 - The beginning of the end.
As always:
http://partners.ny tim es.com/2000/10/05/technology/05SPAC.html
Revelation Zero: The beginning of the end.
Revelation Zero: The beginning of the end.