not to use it, i'm just curious what he coded it in? perl? shell with netcat or something? java? i must admit i don't know a damn thing about this cross site scripting baloney... ahh for the old days of cgi scripts and html and that's it...
64 x 64bit registers vs. 32 x 32bit registers. It's only because this reporter failed to realize Intel's braindead CISCness that he is wrong. And the fact that no one else realized that is kind of disappointing.
What, do they teach hardware courses with Intel processors now (shudder)? Or do they just teach you Java bytecode (shudder)?
One study says placebos don't work. Big forking deal. Hundreds of others say they do. Maybe this study casts some doubt, but that's it. I'm not convinced. Not sure why this was either a) written up in the times or b) posted here.
Granted, I don't know everything about Virtualizing OS's, but from the sounds of it they aren't patenting the concept itself - just certain aspects of their particular implementation. For example, all the stuff regarding the "SuperOS" is just baloney regarding their particular kernel. Restrictive partitioning of storage devices just sounds to me like the particular way they've chosen to do this, not the only way - software disk quotas, for example, could be used to achieve the same effect. As for "system virualization and virtual table of contents", the first term they use their sounds like they are trying to patent the whole concept of the virtual machine, but given the second, it sounds like something specific to their particular implementation, again. I don't think this is really a ploy to charge IBM or VMware licensing fees.
In fact, if it was, it would surely fail, and if it wasn't who cares? The amount of information on that site is so small anyway it hardly warrants an article.
Forget the whole more eyes less bugs stuff. I trust open source for the simple reason that development is decentralized, yet structured (at least in OpenBSD's case). With many developers, you only have to trust that people are working in their own best interests - that is, if you accept the perhaps shaky notion that it's harder for developers to introduce backdoors when other developers are watching, even though there are more developers who may possibly introduce said backdoors.
Ok, let's say I had swiped 5 pages for non-educational but still non-commercial uses. Ie, I'm not gonna resell it, but I'm not just reading it to be enlightened. Also, let's say it's not a textbook - it's a short paperback, 50 pages long, so it's 10% of the full work. I think the point I was trying to make is still valid. Besides, people don't want to go to the hassle of trying to find the mp3s, then burning them, when they can just spend $10 more and get the real deal, with a fancy cover and everything. Metallica has missed the point.
> Why didn't the Users of Naspter go to Metallica to discuss things first like you suggest "Real people" do? Metallica using lawyers came AFTER their songs were available on Naspter. That's just simply not realistic. Yesterday I went to the local copy shop with a friend of mine's textbook because I only needed 5 pages of it for a class. I copied it, and I feel no shame, and I doubt the authors would give a crap if I had asked them "Hey, do you mind if I copy 5 pages from your book?" In fact, they probably wouldn't even have responded to my request. The fact is people who publish copyrighted work (normally) understand that their copyright is not so much an absolute guarantee against copying, but just a device to keep the magnitude smaller. As in security, you can throw as many locks as you want on the door, but someone could still get in if they really wanted to - you're the fool if you think any setup is foolproof. The real question is why didn't Metallica go to their fans before suing and say, "Hey, if you like our music, and you want to hear more of it, you'd better cut the crap, because we can't make money if you do this - we're willing to sue if you don't." IMHO that would have given Metallica the ethical upper hand (even tho they already have the legal one). > And Metallica feels that this is an example of how people are being abused by technology. I'm sure that is how they feel - they are wrong. And it's all due to an outdated copyright and legal system. In fact, capitalism as it exists now doesn't understand how to deal with the internet, or any other medium for the rapid, simple transmission of text. When our laws were created, pulp was the way ideas were transferred, and copying them just usually wasn't worth the effort, since the official publisher held a vast advantage in size, and thus economy. I have no idea if capitalism can evolve or not, but I do think it's possible that a better system can be invented - the Internet, the environment, and protection of worker's rights have all recently banged against the limits of an already tired capitalist framework that hasn't changed much since the advent of transfer payments during the Great Depression - until recently, the government has been too busy fighting the evil of Naziism and then Communism. Hey, that's *3* cents, buddy, and don't you forget it. Cheers!
I think alot of the posters are missing the point. mp3.com proper (ie not the my.mp3.com service) simply allows people to download unsigned acts. my.mp3.com, is a very different service. basically it has an index of popular CD's. in order to listen to mp3's a user had to actually put the CD in to their CD drive (which the software recorded), and then they could listen to the mp3 tracks mp3.com made of that CD at any time, since they owned the CD. The only difference between this and making a simple taped dub for personal use is that this is a lot easier. For a parallel, consider the following situation: I have a couple of CDs I have purchased, but I don't want to have to bring them back and forth to work when I go there. So, I rip and mp3enc them, and put them on an ftp server on my home computer (password protected of course so only I can get them). Then at work, I download those mp3's and play them (better yet I use some sort of streaming audio solution, which would be exactly like my.mp3.com's setup). I hardly think there is anything wrong with that - morally or legally. And if there is a legal problem with it, I guess our country is more screwed up then I thought it was. I can't help but think that the judge had no understanding of the technical issues involved before the case, and thus Sony's arguments served as an introduction to the mp3 for him. The root of the problem is that no one in this country is as liberal as the founding fathers were (or at least as liberal as we are taught they were in school). So, whenever a new technology or social problem comes along, a given percentage of the populace (usually the ones that stand to lose money at the expense of the little guy) says "Screw freedom! That's bad! Outlaw it!" and the money-driven court industry quickly follows suit.
Engineering is not "higher education." It is merely trade-specific training. Just because you learn integrals instead of some sort of manual labor doesn't change that.
Slashdot Mirror
not to use it, i'm just curious what he coded it in? perl? shell with netcat or something? java? i must admit i don't know a damn thing about this cross site scripting baloney... ahh for the old days of cgi scripts and html and that's it...
64 x 64bit registers vs. 32 x 32bit registers. It's only because this reporter failed to realize Intel's braindead CISCness that he is wrong. And the fact that no one else realized that is kind of disappointing. What, do they teach hardware courses with Intel processors now (shudder)? Or do they just teach you Java bytecode (shudder)?
One study says placebos don't work. Big forking deal. Hundreds of others say they do. Maybe this study casts some doubt, but that's it. I'm not convinced. Not sure why this was either a) written up in the times or b) posted here.
Granted, I don't know everything about Virtualizing OS's, but from the sounds of it they aren't patenting the concept itself - just certain aspects of their particular implementation. For example, all the stuff regarding the "SuperOS" is just baloney regarding their particular kernel. Restrictive partitioning of storage devices just sounds to me like the particular way they've chosen to do this, not the only way - software disk quotas, for example, could be used to achieve the same effect. As for "system virualization and virtual table of contents", the first term they use their sounds like they are trying to patent the whole concept of the virtual machine, but given the second, it sounds like something specific to their particular implementation, again. I don't think this is really a ploy to charge IBM or VMware licensing fees.
In fact, if it was, it would surely fail, and if it wasn't who cares? The amount of information on that site is so small anyway it hardly warrants an article.
Forget the whole more eyes less bugs stuff. I trust open source for the simple reason that development is decentralized, yet structured (at least in OpenBSD's case). With many developers, you only have to trust that people are working in their own best interests - that is, if you accept the perhaps shaky notion that it's harder for developers to introduce backdoors when other developers are watching, even though there are more developers who may possibly introduce said backdoors.
Ok, let's say I had swiped 5 pages for non-educational but still non-commercial uses. Ie, I'm not gonna resell it, but I'm not just reading it to be enlightened. Also, let's say it's not a textbook - it's a short paperback, 50 pages long, so it's 10% of the full work. I think the point I was trying to make is still valid. Besides, people don't want to go to the hassle of trying to find the mp3s, then burning them, when they can just spend $10 more and get the real deal, with a fancy cover and everything. Metallica has missed the point.
> Why didn't the Users of Naspter go to Metallica to discuss things first like you suggest "Real people" do? Metallica using lawyers came AFTER their songs were available on Naspter. That's just simply not realistic. Yesterday I went to the local copy shop with a friend of mine's textbook because I only needed 5 pages of it for a class. I copied it, and I feel no shame, and I doubt the authors would give a crap if I had asked them "Hey, do you mind if I copy 5 pages from your book?" In fact, they probably wouldn't even have responded to my request. The fact is people who publish copyrighted work (normally) understand that their copyright is not so much an absolute guarantee against copying, but just a device to keep the magnitude smaller. As in security, you can throw as many locks as you want on the door, but someone could still get in if they really wanted to - you're the fool if you think any setup is foolproof. The real question is why didn't Metallica go to their fans before suing and say, "Hey, if you like our music, and you want to hear more of it, you'd better cut the crap, because we can't make money if you do this - we're willing to sue if you don't." IMHO that would have given Metallica the ethical upper hand (even tho they already have the legal one). > And Metallica feels that this is an example of how people are being abused by technology. I'm sure that is how they feel - they are wrong. And it's all due to an outdated copyright and legal system. In fact, capitalism as it exists now doesn't understand how to deal with the internet, or any other medium for the rapid, simple transmission of text. When our laws were created, pulp was the way ideas were transferred, and copying them just usually wasn't worth the effort, since the official publisher held a vast advantage in size, and thus economy. I have no idea if capitalism can evolve or not, but I do think it's possible that a better system can be invented - the Internet, the environment, and protection of worker's rights have all recently banged against the limits of an already tired capitalist framework that hasn't changed much since the advent of transfer payments during the Great Depression - until recently, the government has been too busy fighting the evil of Naziism and then Communism. Hey, that's *3* cents, buddy, and don't you forget it. Cheers!
I think alot of the posters are missing the point. mp3.com proper (ie not the my.mp3.com service) simply allows people to download unsigned acts. my.mp3.com, is a very different service. basically it has an index of popular CD's. in order to listen to mp3's a user had to actually put the CD in to their CD drive (which the software recorded), and then they could listen to the mp3 tracks mp3.com made of that CD at any time, since they owned the CD. The only difference between this and making a simple taped dub for personal use is that this is a lot easier. For a parallel, consider the following situation: I have a couple of CDs I have purchased, but I don't want to have to bring them back and forth to work when I go there. So, I rip and mp3enc them, and put them on an ftp server on my home computer (password protected of course so only I can get them). Then at work, I download those mp3's and play them (better yet I use some sort of streaming audio solution, which would be exactly like my.mp3.com's setup). I hardly think there is anything wrong with that - morally or legally. And if there is a legal problem with it, I guess our country is more screwed up then I thought it was. I can't help but think that the judge had no understanding of the technical issues involved before the case, and thus Sony's arguments served as an introduction to the mp3 for him. The root of the problem is that no one in this country is as liberal as the founding fathers were (or at least as liberal as we are taught they were in school). So, whenever a new technology or social problem comes along, a given percentage of the populace (usually the ones that stand to lose money at the expense of the little guy) says "Screw freedom! That's bad! Outlaw it!" and the money-driven court industry quickly follows suit.
Engineering is not "higher education." It is merely trade-specific training. Just because you learn integrals instead of some sort of manual labor doesn't change that.