I can't find the article now but didn't either one of these PVR services or a music storage service get in trouble over de-dup?
If memory serves, the court ruled that because it was reading exactly the same locations & sequence of bytes for all the users with the same file it equated to a public performance.
"I just got a packet from A.B.C.D on interface ethX, if I had to send a packet to A.B.C.D would I use ethX?"
If the answer is yes, then the packet goes along its merry way. If the answer is no, then the packet is most likely spoofed and is dropped.
The performance impact is negligible as such lookups for the destination are already fully optimized by ASICs (hence a cisco 7600 with a measly 300Mhz processor can still route gigabit at wire speed), multi-path is a non-issue (assuming a non-brain dead implementation) as if multiple paths exist the answer to the question would still be yes as long as it came from one of the valid paths.
There might be valid reasons for asymmetric traffic which may prevent this from being universally deployed (say some satellite providers which only send download via satellite and upload is over something else) but for the vast majority of ISPs its safe to deploy.
At the ASN level each ISP is assigned a block of ips, if you are not a transit its a simple matter of just filtering to ensure nothing leaving your network is saying otherwise. Once you hit transit links both this scheme and RPF lose their power as depending on the failure almost any transit link can be a valid path. For such a scheme to work it has to be implemented as close to the end point as possible (which is the general structure of the Internet, intelligence sits near the edge where traffic volumes are reasonable, core is dedicated to just high speed movement of traffic).
Probably won't have to manually add them, someone at Prenda has to have gone to the blogs and seen something they don't like and would have only gotten worse as more people in the company go to the blog to see what all the fuss is about so their ips are most likely there already.
a) If I were a medical practicioner and thought this about one of my patients, I'm not going to show them their records until I got the big guys with the straight jacket on hand and a restraining order done up (not like that going to stop a nutjob, but it helps to have some legal footing).
b) So telling someone you think is lying to you that you think they are lying to you seves what purpose other than to give them feedback that they are not doing a good enough job of lying?
The parts of your medical record I have no issues with are in the hands of your insurance company, the raw facts of what was done and what where the results / outcomes of tests / procedures performed.
Sure, it's sneaky and underhanded, and a skilled lawyer can turn it into a case where the hospital was intentionally deceiving a patient to mislead them into trusting someone... but it's ultimately what's necessary to get anything done.
Is it? Maybe so, but I'm not going to just take "trust us, we're doctors".
Maybe you should read the lead up to this... the patient refused to see anyone else. Given that "their" doctor was not there (he retired so it wasn't just a case of calling him / her in), the only other conculsion I see would have been to turn him away with no treatment (something that goes against the very core of the medical profession, I'm also quite sure the doctors involved aren't proud of having to trick the patient).
I'd understand the explanation if they offer a course of treatment. If you want a full explanation go become a MD, otherwise the risk will always be there that some part of the chart will be taken out of context.
A counter argument is such full disclosure closes off a very (when practiced correctly) effective course of treatment, I'm sure you know what a placebo is and how it is used. The other way is instead of telling a patient their cholesterol level (for example) is off by 30% you tell them it needs to be corrected by 5% and after whatever time with positive results the number is increased slowly so the patient doesn't feel the stress of having to make a big change all at once (I have no stats to back up this claim but most of these cases I would guess occur after some sort of 'incident' where the patient is already in a state of panic, the other time I would expect such a "talk" would be those lucky times where it is caught before an incident, last thing you want is to induce stress which may become the trigger).
I'm going to go out on a limb and say you haven't had any major work done to your car (guessing oil changes, air filters, and you mention a belt being put on backwards). Dropping an engine to change a transmission is far from a fast job and if you have time to stay by your mechanic for something like that then kudos, I gotta get back to work, can't spend all day at the mechanic.
Also I'd hazzard a guess your mechanic is a small shop as most of the mid-size to bigger mechanic shops I've been to can't allow customers in the working area for safety / insurance reasons.
I don't think thats a fair comparison, the parodied material is not what is being pirated.
The copy of MS Word is being pirated, no questions asked, so MS may have a claim but J. K. Rowling probably won't if you are making a parody off of her works.
There never was a need for sites like TPB, just look at pretty much all the P2P software that preceeded it. eMule, Kazaa, etc never needed a central server to host the equivalent of a torrent. Bittorrent itself is also moving away from the torrent site structure http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BitTorrent#Distributed_trackers . The reason I believe these features are only now being developed in Bittorrent is most likely because a simpler / easier way existed and the demand for such a feature was not there.
The reason I think people use TPB, et all instead of google is simply the fact that Google is a general purpose search engine. Search for Ironman in Google you get a bunch of different results including wikipedia pages, links to the movie theatres, stuff completely unrelated to the movies / comics like the "Ironman Triathlon", etc. Do the same search in TPB the latest movie is going to be the #1 result the vast majority of the time. Add in little nice-to-haves like "only give me torrents that are being seeded" which is a very simple specialization based on knowledge of the protocol and its usage makes TPB the clear winner in terms of efficiently finding what the user wants.
This takes nothing away from google search as a tool, just that a better tool for this subset of tasks exists and users are simply following the mantra of "Using the best tool for the job".
I don't see what the Python guys should have to worry about (unless the other "python" company was using that mark in commerce before the real Python guys were).
Question: How much will it cost to oppose the mark? You have to remember this is a non-profit org, this situation is still in the early stages so it may be possible to prevent this from reaching the courts. This assumes someone reasonable at the trademark office....... *thinks about what goes on in the US patent & trademark office*. Oh god they are screwed...
The core claims can be verified: - Microsoft makes most of their money from Windows / Office / Server. - The entertainment division is not making money, hence sucking from the profit makers listed above. - Windows 8 is not the runnaway success microsoft needed.
The base conclusion seems quite logical: - If the profit making departments hit a stumbling block and don't produce enough excess to cover the non-producing departments then the business has a problem.
Which leads to two reasonable fixes (maybe there is another option, I don't really see any): - The simplest / quickest way to fix that problem will be to kill the "parasite" department(s) and refocus so they can come back swinging. or: - IF you have enough in the bank to keep things running till you can sort out the issues then go ahead, no need to axe anyone. Hopefully your new bets pay off but in the mean while you are digging yourself into a deeper hole so you really need those bets to pay off.
I'm not going to defend the rest of the article (who it ends up being sold to, etc) but the above seems to indicate bad things for any departement in Microsoft that is not producing (especially if you subscribe to the view of allot of analysts that windows is taking a nose dive that it may never recover from), and the survival of the various departments will most likely depend on how much value they can be seen to add to the company in the future, or worse yet for the entertainment division how likely they are to turn a profit.
Oh how I wish it was that simple, there are always issues / considerations when deploying. One of the biggest problems is firewalls which if configured correctly will not simply ignore what they don't understand but start raising alarms (this is a big sticking point for business customers). Debugging any issue for users who are used to and understand 192.168.1.1 is going to be quite difficult when faced with IPv6's format (this is the major sticking point for regular home users, they are fine once everything is working but once something doesn't work as expected expect hell).
To your second point, I shudder to think of the consequences. While allot of services remain on IPv4 (bbc.com, cnn.com, amazon.com, twitter.com and ebay.com all lack AAAA records), such a stance requires full dual stack to the customer. At some point you will only have IPv6 to give customers, what then? I've now double checked and what I meant was http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAT64 which would allow customers who are only given an IPv6 address to be able to communicate with the IPv4 internet.
As more services move to IPv6 the load on the NAT64 devices will decrease until they can eventually be removed (I am assuming at this point the pressure for IPv4 addresses will be removed therefore those requiring legacy access should be easy to facilitate via a dual-stack setup, majority of the customer base would be running IPv6 only happily).
Well, I think we got 4-5 who actually asked something that included IPv4 in the request but all they really wanted a block of 4 / 8, most refer to them as public ips.
I think we got 1 requests for IPv6 but it was more a "by the way, do you offer..." question more than a I am actively looking for IPv6. At the time we didn't have our IPv6 block allocated so the request had to be turned away.
As for your 2nd question, I'd hazzard a guess at 10-15%, most of the business customers (and the odd technical home user) have their own internal networks setup (even if it is just a single subnet) and manage static ips for servers, etc. but the vast majority just pull DHCP and couldn't care less. This group is where I expect most of the push-back from going towards IPv6 will come from, their networks are small enough to fit in IPv4, the few that have cared have asked what benefit is there to switch for them.
To that point, if I could figure out how to get one of these 6to4 gateways working (completely transparently, and without needing allot of IPv4 space to deal with the temporary mappings) I'd hazzard a guess that if I changed the setup for a few of our customers to IPv6 they would not notice.
Both google and youtube are available via IPv6 (2607:f8b0:4008:806::100e and 2607:f8b0:400c:c01::be respectively).
What I believe you mean is "we just need a big service to start offering premium content EXCLUSIVELY over IPv6" which will in turn force the users to switch which will in turn get more services to move to IPv6, etc...
I work for an ISP and sadly the reason I see for the stalling of IPv6 is the lack of interest from users, some of the service providers will switch of their own accord but until there is someone to serve on that side its more a token effort rather than a "we need to get this implemented".
I'm not fully seeing how a game that in the presence of DX11 will make use of those features but obviously fail back when they are not available is applicable to this argument.
The baseline target still has to be the consoles, even if it was PCs not all PCs can run DX11 (It is exclusive to Vista and later, so all the people still using XP can't use any of the stuff in the PDF). So although they can obviously push the envelope on PCs wayyyy farther if the user has a beefed up PC the baseline target can't be such a beast.
If I do a fread() / fwrite() I don't care how long the call takes just that it does (I also have no control over how busy the hard drive is, or what else the OS is doing that might make it take longer).
If the call takes less time because the drive is able to fetch the data faster simply means my program runs faster.
So I'd say every program will be able to make use of it, just most users are used to the program taking X time so most deem the speed unnecssesary (then again I hear the same thing about 10+Mb internet links).
I normally play anywhere from 2-5 games at a time, and I still have a 1Tb in my PC alongside the SSD plus most of my actual storage is on the 4Tb NAS (most big media is dvd rips or music which get streamed when needed).
SSD is still expensive by comparison but I'd also argue that the average person would barely use a 1TB fully (I've seen it but kill the duplicates / most important files are stored in the "cloud" anyway). I've seen allot of users live comfortably on a laptop with a normal 500GB hard drive (most of which is still empty) which leads me to believe they could comfortably live on a 256GB SSD (and would love it due to less heat and longer battery life).
Most games now days are around the 20GB mark (WoW, COD: BO2, Diablo III). So even if you only have a 60 there is space for windows and at least 1 game (Don't know why you would buy a 60 nowdays).
they'd make it easier to complain about the spam sent by the user
WTF are you talking about?
You seem a bit confused, the spam button is there to report that a message is spam, the sender, e-mail contents, etc of the message are analyzed to prevent future spam. Seems quite pertinent to your statement.
The targets change ips, email accounts and message formats faster every couple hours if not minutes.
I'd also toss out a stupid question which addresses what this whole ssl issue is about, what is google to do if the account is under someone else's domain?
Slashdot Mirror
Google is the only company that violates your privacy?
A bit late for that IMHO...
I can't find the article now but didn't either one of these PVR services or a music storage service get in trouble over de-dup?
If memory serves, the court ruled that because it was reading exactly the same locations & sequence of bytes for all the users with the same file it equated to a public performance.
Yes, its called Reverse path forwarding http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_path_forwarding for this specific case you would want the unicast version (uRPF).
The concept boils down to a simple question,
"I just got a packet from A.B.C.D on interface ethX, if I had to send a packet to A.B.C.D would I use ethX?"
If the answer is yes, then the packet goes along its merry way. If the answer is no, then the packet is most likely spoofed and is dropped.
The performance impact is negligible as such lookups for the destination are already fully optimized by ASICs (hence a cisco 7600 with a measly 300Mhz processor can still route gigabit at wire speed), multi-path is a non-issue (assuming a non-brain dead implementation) as if multiple paths exist the answer to the question would still be yes as long as it came from one of the valid paths.
There might be valid reasons for asymmetric traffic which may prevent this from being universally deployed (say some satellite providers which only send download via satellite and upload is over something else) but for the vast majority of ISPs its safe to deploy.
At the ASN level each ISP is assigned a block of ips, if you are not a transit its a simple matter of just filtering to ensure nothing leaving your network is saying otherwise. Once you hit transit links both this scheme and RPF lose their power as depending on the failure almost any transit link can be a valid path. For such a scheme to work it has to be implemented as close to the end point as possible (which is the general structure of the Internet, intelligence sits near the edge where traffic volumes are reasonable, core is dedicated to just high speed movement of traffic).
Probably won't have to manually add them, someone at Prenda has to have gone to the blogs and seen something they don't like and would have only gotten worse as more people in the company go to the blog to see what all the fuss is about so their ips are most likely there already.
a) If I were a medical practicioner and thought this about one of my patients, I'm not going to show them their records until I got the big guys with the straight jacket on hand and a restraining order done up (not like that going to stop a nutjob, but it helps to have some legal footing).
b) So telling someone you think is lying to you that you think they are lying to you seves what purpose other than to give them feedback that they are not doing a good enough job of lying?
The parts of your medical record I have no issues with are in the hands of your insurance company, the raw facts of what was done and what where the results / outcomes of tests / procedures performed.
Sure, it's sneaky and underhanded, and a skilled lawyer can turn it into a case where the hospital was intentionally deceiving a patient to mislead them into trusting someone... but it's ultimately what's necessary to get anything done.
Is it? Maybe so, but I'm not going to just take "trust us, we're doctors".
Maybe you should read the lead up to this... the patient refused to see anyone else. Given that "their" doctor was not there (he retired so it wasn't just a case of calling him / her in), the only other conculsion I see would have been to turn him away with no treatment (something that goes against the very core of the medical profession, I'm also quite sure the doctors involved aren't proud of having to trick the patient).
I'd understand the explanation if they offer a course of treatment. If you want a full explanation go become a MD, otherwise the risk will always be there that some part of the chart will be taken out of context.
A counter argument is such full disclosure closes off a very (when practiced correctly) effective course of treatment, I'm sure you know what a placebo is and how it is used. The other way is instead of telling a patient their cholesterol level (for example) is off by 30% you tell them it needs to be corrected by 5% and after whatever time with positive results the number is increased slowly so the patient doesn't feel the stress of having to make a big change all at once (I have no stats to back up this claim but most of these cases I would guess occur after some sort of 'incident' where the patient is already in a state of panic, the other time I would expect such a "talk" would be those lucky times where it is caught before an incident, last thing you want is to induce stress which may become the trigger).
I'm going to go out on a limb and say you haven't had any major work done to your car (guessing oil changes, air filters, and you mention a belt being put on backwards). Dropping an engine to change a transmission is far from a fast job and if you have time to stay by your mechanic for something like that then kudos, I gotta get back to work, can't spend all day at the mechanic.
Also I'd hazzard a guess your mechanic is a small shop as most of the mid-size to bigger mechanic shops I've been to can't allow customers in the working area for safety / insurance reasons.
I was going to say check out the kickstarter page but its in the summary:
'The people making the pen set up a Kickstarter project yesterday with a $30,000 goal.'
The R&D is already done, I'll hazzard a guess it is beacuse the factory isn't going to make 1 or 2 but needs an order of a couple hundred at least.
I don't think thats a fair comparison, the parodied material is not what is being pirated.
The copy of MS Word is being pirated, no questions asked, so MS may have a claim but J. K. Rowling probably won't if you are making a parody off of her works.
There never was a need for sites like TPB, just look at pretty much all the P2P software that preceeded it. eMule, Kazaa, etc never needed a central server to host the equivalent of a torrent. Bittorrent itself is also moving away from the torrent site structure http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BitTorrent#Distributed_trackers . The reason I believe these features are only now being developed in Bittorrent is most likely because a simpler / easier way existed and the demand for such a feature was not there.
The reason I think people use TPB, et all instead of google is simply the fact that Google is a general purpose search engine. Search for Ironman in Google you get a bunch of different results including wikipedia pages, links to the movie theatres, stuff completely unrelated to the movies / comics like the "Ironman Triathlon", etc. Do the same search in TPB the latest movie is going to be the #1 result the vast majority of the time. Add in little nice-to-haves like "only give me torrents that are being seeded" which is a very simple specialization based on knowledge of the protocol and its usage makes TPB the clear winner in terms of efficiently finding what the user wants.
This takes nothing away from google search as a tool, just that a better tool for this subset of tasks exists and users are simply following the mantra of "Using the best tool for the job".
I don't see what the Python guys should have to worry about (unless the other "python" company was using that mark in commerce before the real Python guys were).
Question: How much will it cost to oppose the mark? You have to remember this is a non-profit org, this situation is still in the early stages so it may be possible to prevent this from reaching the courts. This assumes someone reasonable at the trademark office....... *thinks about what goes on in the US patent & trademark office*. Oh god they are screwed...
Wouldn't it be bio homework?
What's so ridiculous about it?
The core claims can be verified:
- Microsoft makes most of their money from Windows / Office / Server.
- The entertainment division is not making money, hence sucking from the profit makers listed above.
- Windows 8 is not the runnaway success microsoft needed.
The base conclusion seems quite logical:
- If the profit making departments hit a stumbling block and don't produce enough excess to cover the non-producing departments then the business has a problem.
Which leads to two reasonable fixes (maybe there is another option, I don't really see any):
- The simplest / quickest way to fix that problem will be to kill the "parasite" department(s) and refocus so they can come back swinging.
or:
- IF you have enough in the bank to keep things running till you can sort out the issues then go ahead, no need to axe anyone. Hopefully your new bets pay off but in the mean while you are digging yourself into a deeper hole so you really need those bets to pay off.
I'm not going to defend the rest of the article (who it ends up being sold to, etc) but the above seems to indicate bad things for any departement in Microsoft that is not producing (especially if you subscribe to the view of allot of analysts that windows is taking a nose dive that it may never recover from), and the survival of the various departments will most likely depend on how much value they can be seen to add to the company in the future, or worse yet for the entertainment division how likely they are to turn a profit.
Oh how I wish it was that simple, there are always issues / considerations when deploying. One of the biggest problems is firewalls which if configured correctly will not simply ignore what they don't understand but start raising alarms (this is a big sticking point for business customers). Debugging any issue for users who are used to and understand 192.168.1.1 is going to be quite difficult when faced with IPv6's format (this is the major sticking point for regular home users, they are fine once everything is working but once something doesn't work as expected expect hell).
To your second point, I shudder to think of the consequences. While allot of services remain on IPv4 (bbc.com, cnn.com, amazon.com, twitter.com and ebay.com all lack AAAA records), such a stance requires full dual stack to the customer. At some point you will only have IPv6 to give customers, what then? I've now double checked and what I meant was http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAT64 which would allow customers who are only given an IPv6 address to be able to communicate with the IPv4 internet.
As more services move to IPv6 the load on the NAT64 devices will decrease until they can eventually be removed (I am assuming at this point the pressure for IPv4 addresses will be removed therefore those requiring legacy access should be easy to facilitate via a dual-stack setup, majority of the customer base would be running IPv6 only happily).
Well, I think we got 4-5 who actually asked something that included IPv4 in the request but all they really wanted a block of 4 / 8, most refer to them as public ips.
I think we got 1 requests for IPv6 but it was more a "by the way, do you offer..." question more than a I am actively looking for IPv6. At the time we didn't have our IPv6 block allocated so the request had to be turned away.
As for your 2nd question, I'd hazzard a guess at 10-15%, most of the business customers (and the odd technical home user) have their own internal networks setup (even if it is just a single subnet) and manage static ips for servers, etc. but the vast majority just pull DHCP and couldn't care less. This group is where I expect most of the push-back from going towards IPv6 will come from, their networks are small enough to fit in IPv4, the few that have cared have asked what benefit is there to switch for them.
To that point, if I could figure out how to get one of these 6to4 gateways working (completely transparently, and without needing allot of IPv4 space to deal with the temporary mappings) I'd hazzard a guess that if I changed the setup for a few of our customers to IPv6 they would not notice.
Both google and youtube are available via IPv6 (2607:f8b0:4008:806::100e and 2607:f8b0:400c:c01::be respectively).
What I believe you mean is "we just need a big service to start offering premium content EXCLUSIVELY over IPv6" which will in turn force the users to switch which will in turn get more services to move to IPv6, etc...
I work for an ISP and sadly the reason I see for the stalling of IPv6 is the lack of interest from users, some of the service providers will switch of their own accord but until there is someone to serve on that side its more a token effort rather than a "we need to get this implemented".
I would have thought this was the new anti-spy measure they implemented...
I'm not fully seeing how a game that in the presence of DX11 will make use of those features but obviously fail back when they are not available is applicable to this argument.
The baseline target still has to be the consoles, even if it was PCs not all PCs can run DX11 (It is exclusive to Vista and later, so all the people still using XP can't use any of the stuff in the PDF). So although they can obviously push the envelope on PCs wayyyy farther if the user has a beefed up PC the baseline target can't be such a beast.
If I do a fread() / fwrite() I don't care how long the call takes just that it does (I also have no control over how busy the hard drive is, or what else the OS is doing that might make it take longer).
If the call takes less time because the drive is able to fetch the data faster simply means my program runs faster.
So I'd say every program will be able to make use of it, just most users are used to the program taking X time so most deem the speed unnecssesary (then again I hear the same thing about 10+Mb internet links).
You got 2TB worth of games you actually play?
I normally play anywhere from 2-5 games at a time, and I still have a 1Tb in my PC alongside the SSD plus most of my actual storage is on the 4Tb NAS (most big media is dvd rips or music which get streamed when needed).
SSD is still expensive by comparison but I'd also argue that the average person would barely use a 1TB fully (I've seen it but kill the duplicates / most important files are stored in the "cloud" anyway). I've seen allot of users live comfortably on a laptop with a normal 500GB hard drive (most of which is still empty) which leads me to believe they could comfortably live on a 256GB SSD (and would love it due to less heat and longer battery life).
Or even 120GB?
Most games now days are around the 20GB mark (WoW, COD: BO2, Diablo III). So even if you only have a 60 there is space for windows and at least 1 game (Don't know why you would buy a 60 nowdays).
Sad part is you are probably alone there, the nexxus group seems to be the only ones without micro sd slots.
I'd say choose another brand, hopefully google will get it at some point.
they'd make it easier to complain about the spam sent by the user
WTF are you talking about?
You seem a bit confused, the spam button is there to report that a message is spam, the sender, e-mail contents, etc of the message are analyzed to prevent future spam. Seems quite pertinent to your statement.
The "Spam" button is not enough?
The targets change ips, email accounts and message formats faster every couple hours if not minutes.
I'd also toss out a stupid question which addresses what this whole ssl issue is about, what is google to do if the account is under someone else's domain?