DRM only on streaming would be practically pointless if the same product is for sale without DRM. Why would you trust people to not share their purchased content with a million of their closest friends as prohibited by copyright law, yet not trust them to follow the streaming agreement?
There doesn't have to be a download button in the streaming application, but if you're willing to use a network/memory/display sniffer/download tool to get it in violation of your subscription agreement you're probably also willing to torrent the copy that someone will inevitably share.
It sort of sounds reasonable until you realize that for DRM to work the entire stack under it must be trusted. You can't have a trusted DRM app if the kernel will just snoop it. You can't have a trusted DRM app if you can just dump the frame buffer.
Microsoft claimed the GPL was viral, well DRM is extremely viral. Anything touched by DRM'd content must be closed source and "robust" against attacks. All copies of DRM-managed content must be under DRM, sold or streamed. Accepting DRM is death for Linux, X, open source drivers and open source applications.
On a human timescale that is certainly concerning, on a cosmological scale it doesn't really explain anything about life in the universe. We could wait 1000 years with further human exploration and it'd still be a blink of an eye in a universe billions of years old.
True, we don't get to do much colonization but I feel we live in a very exciting age when it comes to knowledge of the universe. I may have missed the moon landing but when I was born, exoplanets were just a theoretical concept. Now we have over 500 confirmed planets and 1000 candidates and we're mapping out uncharted territory right now. Within my lifetime I have good hope we'll find a earth-like planet in an earth-like orbit around a sun-like star, to me that is huge.
Like it or not, robots have become our eyes and ears and any human "exploration" we do probably really won't be exploration anymore. Long before any human has set his foot there we'll already know all about the landing site, ground conditions, atmosphere, temperature, weather conditions and so on. And apart from the few people actually going all we'll see are recordings anyway, except now with a man in a space suit.
Remote controlled and semi-autonomous robots do more and more advanced things, you have to ask if having a human on-site would be productivity enhancing or just productivity limiting in that he needs shelter, air, food, heat and such things. It's nice to know we can move a man to a bunker on Mars and eat canned supplies, but if that's all he can contribute with that's not really all that interesting. It would just be to prove we could do it, then we would stop just like with the manned moon missions.
I'm feeling we're no more than an Apollo decade away from landing on Mars, but what we really need are working plans for a Mars base. At least have them sit out one return cycle (happens every 2 years) and be there a few years, not two months. Try excavating some kind of structure that could be a starting point for later expeditions. Not just land and leave a flag and some boot prints.
In which three ways does Ubuntu+Wine outsuck Windows? For example, where's the equivalent on Windows to the huge library of free, Free apps on Ubuntu Software Center?
1. If you're going to bring WINE into it, you've kind of lost already. Windows is vastly superior to WINE for running the vast, vast library of closed source software out there on top of having the most important open source apps like OpenOffice, Firefox and so on - if it doesn't exist for Windows nobody saw the value in porting it. Many people have this one "speciality" app that there's no good open source replacement for, it adds up. And you can be almost certain that if your needs change, there is some niche app that'll run on Windows. You have more choice from free/Free to cheap to expensive software depending on your needs.
2. Stability and quality on equivalent parts to Windows 7. The kernel is rock stable, because all servers critically depend on it. X, Gnome/KDE and the menus/panels are not. The equivalent of basic tools like the Explorer (not IE, the file explorer) are not. The system applets like network/printer/bluetooth etc. are not. My impression that they're all aiming for the social media semantic desktop 2.0 when the traditional "support and manage my hardware, launch my apps" desktop still needs work. True you can have more than one thought at once, but it's a bit like tweaking the car seat controls when the engine/brakes/transmission/steeing needs work.
3. If I report a bug, there's no support department, if nobody picks it up your report is dropped on the floor. Fix it yourself, you got what you paid for, keep testing and re-reporting that it's still a problem otherwise it's "solved" by attrition. Same goes for release testing, developers work on master and catching regressions and breakage is up to the beta testers aka users. In short, that on Windows it's your bug and nobody expects me to dig through a foreign source code in a language I barely know in search of a fix. True there are some issues with lock-in, forced obsolescence and featuritis, but closed source companies tend to fix the bugs and deliver the features most users want, as opposed to hobbyists that do what the developers want.
Sounds a bit like "Yes, I'll knock before entering but I'll install a video camera in the corner". It's a solution to provide Internet access without privacy, but it's not a solution when your children start wanting privacy. They will known nothing they do on the computer is private to you and find some other way of doing things. Since so many computers are laptops today I'd probably go for that solution too, but it's an alternative to the "computer in livingroom" phase, not the later stages.
In my book, violence does not have to be physical or even overtly coercive. Any act which violates another person without being, on balance, good is in my book an act of violence. (...) The "on balance good" test covers things like (...) forcing a child to go to bed at a certain time
So if I'm an overprotective mother who forces the child to go to bed so early it fails the test, I'm committing an act of violence against that child? An act that violates is a violation, violence almost exclusively means physical force - none of the other uses like a violent storm really apply here. I think it's you that's using a dictionary different from everyone else.
Well, it's not entirely without cause. If you have a picture of a little girl and a picture of a dick, both are legal. If you photoshop them together so it looks like a sexual situation involving the girl, it's child pornography. If this wasn't the case you could make and distribute lots of extremely realistic pictures this way without risking any real penalty.
Well, the video has since been removed by Youtube. And since it has been removed, I can't watch the video and make my own judgment about what was said.
Well what do you expect youtube or the police to do if they come across something they think falls under the definition kiddie porn? No need to search the shady corners of the Internet if you can just "study evidence". Duh.
I am more interested in them proving that you CAN make regular releases and make it work. It's much easier to sell an "agile" development program to people when you have a good example from a well known company.
I don't know how Chrome development works, but bi-annual releases aren't a very strong sign of agile. I know quite a bit of corporate software on a spring/fall release schedule but are quite traditional all the same.
Most people see that even free speech needs to have some border towards slander, intimidation, harassment and other related topics. I may be far out there on the "sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me" scale but I wouldn't take any accusation, any threat or any treatment.
Calling me once is not harassment. Calling me hundreds of times at all hours of the day, even after I've told you to stop is harassment even if you've used nothing but speech. Threatening to bust my kneecaps should obviously be a crime. Lying about me to my employer so I get fired likewise.
The question is one of sensibilities as some could feel slandered, intimidated or harassed for practically nothing. I see the problem, but I can't really go to the other extreme that nobody should ever feel that way. And between the clearly legal and clearly illegal I do see shades of gray.
Pardon me for saying so, but why in hell would Anonymous give PR to this weird little cult? Apart from being grossly disgusting they seem fairly few and harmless and their sole power is the outraged press they garner.
They're the kind of religious nuts you can't reason with because they see everything as proof they are right. Hell, isn't this the same creeps that wanted to show up in the funeral of that 9yo girl that got shot? I think these people are going for martyrdom and hoping someone will open fire on them. I'd be tempted.
Yep, CRC doesn't deserve being called a hash at all. It's just a checksum really, like the control digit on your credit card number. Good against random corruption, no good against a maliciously inserted payload.
Yes. It was the idea that there's be a secure box connected over a secure cable to a secure playback device. It may be irrelevant but they still use CSS. They still prosecute companies that ship a DVD backup/converter program. It's still a DMCA/EUCD violation since there's "fair use" but no "fair circumvention". They can not stop you doing it, but they do everything to argue that it's wrong and that you're a criminal by doing it. When they introduce their next DRM format they will pretend nothing is taken away, because you were never supposed to be able to do it to begin with. Oh well...
Wrong, wrong, wrong! The store is not the distributor, they are the retailer. You can buy Ubuntu DVDs online, that does not make the person selling it responsible for the gpl, unless they are the ones who also put it together, in which case they are a developer.
If you're starting a post with "Wrong, wrong, wrong" you should at least be right. Whoever makes copies has to comply with copyright law. The Ubuntu DVDs have already been copied up and the retailer only sells those copies, he does not make them. App stores that lets you download software does make copies and require a valid license for doing so.
I'm sure Microsoft could try all sorts of legal tricks saying they're only executing the copying on behalf of the developer like what a printing press is to a newspaper, but they will have huge problems as they do the whole sales and delivery process and take a commission from it and act more like a publisher than a production tool. I'm quite sure you could sue Microsoft and win if your software was illegally sold through the store, I doubt the liability protections would extend to what they're doing.
At least for SMS the phone company will have a very exact time of when it was sent, I imagine Facebook will too. The only uncertainty is how long the message has been stuck in your outbox. At least for writing SMS messages people have been convicted of manslaughter here in Norway, passing even the standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt".
That is the weak point that allows governments to set-up their recorders and track everything the citizens do. We need to find a way to communicate directly with one another.
Walkie-talkies and wireless mesh networks? Oh please. We need the cell phone towers and the internet backbone to make it work.
It's better trying to create a network within the network. Instead of sending an email, you use $random open source message/file transfer system.
What worries me is the continous location they'll keep on my cell phone (most smart phones communicate all the time to check for mail etc), that I really don't see an easy way to avoid.
Most likely the one who steps up will fail exactly because he's not Steve Jobs, no matter what he does. What Apple has done is to overcome the catch 22 of users and content because Jobs has a following of rabid fans and loyal developers big enough to kick start any market. It's like setting off a nuke, you need critical mass or you get a fizzle.
Jobs has the customers go "yeah" then the developers go "yeah" then the tech press goes "yeah" and the cheers runs in circles. The next guy will have the customers go "ummmmmm" then the developers go "ummmmmm" then the tech press goes "ummmmmmm" and the doubt runs in circles. Apple can spiral down just as quick as they've spiraled up.
You omitted the "license requires" part, which makes it quite different. The source code of a BSD app may be disclosed, but it's not required by the BSD license. While open source is typically redistributed at no cost, it's not a requirement of the license.
So there's no problem with BSD apps or freeware. The only one with teeth is (ii), which bans all libraries, engines and copyleft licenses but for an end user store only copyleft is really relevant. So it's basically down to (L)GPL, CDDL and maybe a few more that are banned.
* speaking of plugins, they are not considered GPL-able software despite many of them existing with GPL licenses - I suggested adding it during v3 ratification, but they did not feel there was a need (there are several clauses that make them not applicable), so if you write GPL plugins, I suggest moving to another license because the one you're using is not valid.
Bullshit. Worst case you've created an impossible situation where you can't legally use the plug-in, but the license on the source itself is as valid as any other. If I take any source from your plugin to use in my completely unrelated project, the GPL applies. The FSF also has several questions in the FAQ about this, so I don't know where you ever got your ideas from.
Again, you'd have to expect the software to get many times faster.
I don't think that's an unreasonable assumption though, parsing a natural sentence into computer logic seems like a very hard problem. Languages are full of idiosyncrasies, ambiguities, implied context, fuzzy definitions and subtly changing meaning.
Let's for example take "named after", and that you can properly parse the sentence to find "name" is a transitive verb and "after" is a preposition. That narrows it down to 5 and 12 meanings respectively:
tr.v. named, namÂing, names 1. To give a name to: named the child after both grandparents. 2. To mention, specify, or cite by name: named the primary colors. 3. To call by an epithet: named them all cowards. 4. To nominate for or appoint to a duty, an office, or an honor. See Synonyms at appoint. 5. To specify or fix: We need to name the time for our meeting. adj. Informal Well-known by a name: a name performer.
â" prep 1. following in time; in succession to: after dinner ; time after time 2. following; behind: they entered one after another 3. in pursuit or search of: chasing after a thief ; he's only after money 4. concerning: to inquire after his health 5. considering: after what you have done, you shouldn't complain 6. next in excellence or importance to: he ranked Jonson after Shakespeare 7. in imitation of; in the manner of: a statue after classical models 8. in accordance with or in conformity to: a man after her own heart 9. with a name derived from: Mary was named after her grandmother 10. ( US ) past (the hour of): twenty after three 11. after all
a. in spite of everything: it's only a game, after all
b. in spite of expectations, efforts, etc: he won the race after all! 12. after you please go, enter, etc, before me
You can spend lots of power trying to brute force score it into 5*12 possible combinations. Or you could ignore human word boundaries and make "named after" a phrase with a specific meaning. I imagine that by special casing such constructs you could improve performance immensely.
The better question is if it'll create a backlash or even more of a "OMG the pedos are everywhere, think of the children" stampede. Remember, the police have no interest in downplaying the threat and their budgets and there's a molester lurking on every corner of the intertubes. It's like all their "crushing blows", there always seem to be people left for more blows.
No. HDV is 1440x1080i at maximum, but 1440p refers to the vertical resolution. 2560x1440 is not a very common resolution but found in monitors like Dell UltraSharp U2711, Apple LED Cinema Display 27 and Nec NEC SpectraView Reference 271W. You'll have an easier time finding ice cream in Sahara than native 1440p content though.
Thing is when it gets to a production model - will batteries cope with a dual core phone? A lot of current phones have problems especially with low signal areas draining the batteries regardless of 'optimum' conditions they tend to use when stating battery life.
Well, the question is how much signal strength will matter at all. I play many games on my iPhone that are relatively CPU/GPU intense as opposed to communication intense. I can easily play Angry Birds in flight mode, sure from time to time I want to compare my scores online but it's mostly irrelevant to short time use. From laptops we know that higher power CPUs often means it executes faster and returns to sleep stages faster. Obviously if games continues to max the hardware we'll see shorter battery lives but the same games may end up lasting longer on a more powerful phone than a less powerful one. I at least know with myself that I often trade battery life for gaming because I know I'm on a 4-8 hour trip with a socket to charge it with at the end. If you can give me a more flexible device with better gaming for those hours, I'm all for it even though if total battery life sucks in that mode.
So now Microsoft can put me on the untrusted database for using linux and banks will not want to give me a loan. I'm so building my next computer from scratch.
Nobody will stop you from NOT getting a certificate by installing an "untrusted" OS on "trusted" hardware and you probably won't get non-trusted hardware just like you can't get a monitor without HDCP (over DVI/HDMI/DP) or a DVD/BluRay player without CSS/AACS.
The point is that they're pushing to make this a requirement for using any major corporate or government service and turn you into a digital caveman. You will get a top-to-bottom locked down system because it's the only thing that'll work. And because it's signed all the way down to hardware, your Linux box will never be able to reverse engineer or emulate it. It's the One Microsoft Way or the highway.
Cost and availability of bandwidth varies extremely much depending on where you are and by what way you're connected. I recently bought Fifa 11 for my iPhone (1$ sale on valentine's day, massive bang for the buck) and it was 800 MB+, way more than my 500 MB/month quota. There is an unlimited plan but it costs hellishly much and the phone doesn't let you download apps over 20 MB via 3G anyway. Was that a problem? No, because i downloaded it over my wifi which is hooked up to a 25 Mbit line with no quota.
While it is in range of my wifi, I wouldn't mind if it loaded up on content I'd want to watch. I just don't think there's any automated system intelligent enough - or rather clairvoyant enough - to actually be useful. I could see it for stuff I was subscribed to, like "When there's a new episode of the Simpsons and I'm on wifi then automatically predownload" sort of thing but not in general. That is, if such a service existed.
It's almost no point in looking at prices, almost all the cost is in the R&D and the price is determined pretty much only by the consumers and the competition. What matters for the long term survivability are the margins and if they're big enough to fund future R&D. Otherwise Intel will very soon be putting out chips that are faster, cheaper and lower power at prices AMD can't turn a profit at all.
The only reason Intel doesn't stomp AMD out of the market (except anti-trust) is because dropping their prices that low would hurt their profits. Even when AMD does their design better than Intel like when they were doing Netburst and Itanic then the huge lead time and investment cost means AMD can't swoop in and take the market. They would have to bet billions up front in plants and capacity on the belief that Fusion will be a killer, if it does only average or if Intel pulls a similar ace out of the hole then AMD is done for.
I think AMD would only be "used up" by Dell. Put in computers as long as they're profitable to produce without much R&D, then end up with an outdated technology that's not worth producing.
Slashdot Mirror
DRM only on streaming would be practically pointless if the same product is for sale without DRM. Why would you trust people to not share their purchased content with a million of their closest friends as prohibited by copyright law, yet not trust them to follow the streaming agreement?
There doesn't have to be a download button in the streaming application, but if you're willing to use a network/memory/display sniffer/download tool to get it in violation of your subscription agreement you're probably also willing to torrent the copy that someone will inevitably share.
It sort of sounds reasonable until you realize that for DRM to work the entire stack under it must be trusted. You can't have a trusted DRM app if the kernel will just snoop it. You can't have a trusted DRM app if you can just dump the frame buffer.
Microsoft claimed the GPL was viral, well DRM is extremely viral. Anything touched by DRM'd content must be closed source and "robust" against attacks. All copies of DRM-managed content must be under DRM, sold or streamed. Accepting DRM is death for Linux, X, open source drivers and open source applications.
On a human timescale that is certainly concerning, on a cosmological scale it doesn't really explain anything about life in the universe. We could wait 1000 years with further human exploration and it'd still be a blink of an eye in a universe billions of years old.
True, we don't get to do much colonization but I feel we live in a very exciting age when it comes to knowledge of the universe. I may have missed the moon landing but when I was born, exoplanets were just a theoretical concept. Now we have over 500 confirmed planets and 1000 candidates and we're mapping out uncharted territory right now. Within my lifetime I have good hope we'll find a earth-like planet in an earth-like orbit around a sun-like star, to me that is huge.
Like it or not, robots have become our eyes and ears and any human "exploration" we do probably really won't be exploration anymore. Long before any human has set his foot there we'll already know all about the landing site, ground conditions, atmosphere, temperature, weather conditions and so on. And apart from the few people actually going all we'll see are recordings anyway, except now with a man in a space suit.
Remote controlled and semi-autonomous robots do more and more advanced things, you have to ask if having a human on-site would be productivity enhancing or just productivity limiting in that he needs shelter, air, food, heat and such things. It's nice to know we can move a man to a bunker on Mars and eat canned supplies, but if that's all he can contribute with that's not really all that interesting. It would just be to prove we could do it, then we would stop just like with the manned moon missions.
I'm feeling we're no more than an Apollo decade away from landing on Mars, but what we really need are working plans for a Mars base. At least have them sit out one return cycle (happens every 2 years) and be there a few years, not two months. Try excavating some kind of structure that could be a starting point for later expeditions. Not just land and leave a flag and some boot prints.
In which three ways does Ubuntu+Wine outsuck Windows? For example, where's the equivalent on Windows to the huge library of free, Free apps on Ubuntu Software Center?
1. If you're going to bring WINE into it, you've kind of lost already. Windows is vastly superior to WINE for running the vast, vast library of closed source software out there on top of having the most important open source apps like OpenOffice, Firefox and so on - if it doesn't exist for Windows nobody saw the value in porting it. Many people have this one "speciality" app that there's no good open source replacement for, it adds up. And you can be almost certain that if your needs change, there is some niche app that'll run on Windows. You have more choice from free/Free to cheap to expensive software depending on your needs.
2. Stability and quality on equivalent parts to Windows 7. The kernel is rock stable, because all servers critically depend on it. X, Gnome/KDE and the menus/panels are not. The equivalent of basic tools like the Explorer (not IE, the file explorer) are not. The system applets like network/printer/bluetooth etc. are not. My impression that they're all aiming for the social media semantic desktop 2.0 when the traditional "support and manage my hardware, launch my apps" desktop still needs work. True you can have more than one thought at once, but it's a bit like tweaking the car seat controls when the engine/brakes/transmission/steeing needs work.
3. If I report a bug, there's no support department, if nobody picks it up your report is dropped on the floor. Fix it yourself, you got what you paid for, keep testing and re-reporting that it's still a problem otherwise it's "solved" by attrition. Same goes for release testing, developers work on master and catching regressions and breakage is up to the beta testers aka users. In short, that on Windows it's your bug and nobody expects me to dig through a foreign source code in a language I barely know in search of a fix. True there are some issues with lock-in, forced obsolescence and featuritis, but closed source companies tend to fix the bugs and deliver the features most users want, as opposed to hobbyists that do what the developers want.
Sounds a bit like "Yes, I'll knock before entering but I'll install a video camera in the corner". It's a solution to provide Internet access without privacy, but it's not a solution when your children start wanting privacy. They will known nothing they do on the computer is private to you and find some other way of doing things. Since so many computers are laptops today I'd probably go for that solution too, but it's an alternative to the "computer in livingroom" phase, not the later stages.
In my book, violence does not have to be physical or even overtly coercive. Any act which violates another person without being, on balance, good is in my book an act of violence. (...) The "on balance good" test covers things like (...) forcing a child to go to bed at a certain time
So if I'm an overprotective mother who forces the child to go to bed so early it fails the test, I'm committing an act of violence against that child? An act that violates is a violation, violence almost exclusively means physical force - none of the other uses like a violent storm really apply here. I think it's you that's using a dictionary different from everyone else.
Well, it's not entirely without cause. If you have a picture of a little girl and a picture of a dick, both are legal. If you photoshop them together so it looks like a sexual situation involving the girl, it's child pornography. If this wasn't the case you could make and distribute lots of extremely realistic pictures this way without risking any real penalty.
Well, the video has since been removed by Youtube. And since it has been removed, I can't watch the video and make my own judgment about what was said.
Well what do you expect youtube or the police to do if they come across something they think falls under the definition kiddie porn? No need to search the shady corners of the Internet if you can just "study evidence". Duh.
I am more interested in them proving that you CAN make regular releases and make it work. It's much easier to sell an "agile" development program to people when you have a good example from a well known company.
I don't know how Chrome development works, but bi-annual releases aren't a very strong sign of agile. I know quite a bit of corporate software on a spring/fall release schedule but are quite traditional all the same.
Most people see that even free speech needs to have some border towards slander, intimidation, harassment and other related topics. I may be far out there on the "sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me" scale but I wouldn't take any accusation, any threat or any treatment.
Calling me once is not harassment. Calling me hundreds of times at all hours of the day, even after I've told you to stop is harassment even if you've used nothing but speech. Threatening to bust my kneecaps should obviously be a crime. Lying about me to my employer so I get fired likewise.
The question is one of sensibilities as some could feel slandered, intimidated or harassed for practically nothing. I see the problem, but I can't really go to the other extreme that nobody should ever feel that way. And between the clearly legal and clearly illegal I do see shades of gray.
Pardon me for saying so, but why in hell would Anonymous give PR to this weird little cult? Apart from being grossly disgusting they seem fairly few and harmless and their sole power is the outraged press they garner.
They're the kind of religious nuts you can't reason with because they see everything as proof they are right. Hell, isn't this the same creeps that wanted to show up in the funeral of that 9yo girl that got shot? I think these people are going for martyrdom and hoping someone will open fire on them. I'd be tempted.
Yep, CRC doesn't deserve being called a hash at all. It's just a checksum really, like the control digit on your credit card number. Good against random corruption, no good against a maliciously inserted payload.
Yes. It was the idea that there's be a secure box connected over a secure cable to a secure playback device. It may be irrelevant but they still use CSS. They still prosecute companies that ship a DVD backup/converter program. It's still a DMCA/EUCD violation since there's "fair use" but no "fair circumvention". They can not stop you doing it, but they do everything to argue that it's wrong and that you're a criminal by doing it. When they introduce their next DRM format they will pretend nothing is taken away, because you were never supposed to be able to do it to begin with. Oh well...
Wrong, wrong, wrong! The store is not the distributor, they are the retailer. You can buy Ubuntu DVDs online, that does not make the person selling it responsible for the gpl, unless they are the ones who also put it together, in which case they are a developer.
If you're starting a post with "Wrong, wrong, wrong" you should at least be right. Whoever makes copies has to comply with copyright law. The Ubuntu DVDs have already been copied up and the retailer only sells those copies, he does not make them. App stores that lets you download software does make copies and require a valid license for doing so.
I'm sure Microsoft could try all sorts of legal tricks saying they're only executing the copying on behalf of the developer like what a printing press is to a newspaper, but they will have huge problems as they do the whole sales and delivery process and take a commission from it and act more like a publisher than a production tool. I'm quite sure you could sue Microsoft and win if your software was illegally sold through the store, I doubt the liability protections would extend to what they're doing.
At least for SMS the phone company will have a very exact time of when it was sent, I imagine Facebook will too. The only uncertainty is how long the message has been stuck in your outbox. At least for writing SMS messages people have been convicted of manslaughter here in Norway, passing even the standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt".
That is the weak point that allows governments to set-up their recorders and track everything the citizens do. We need to find a way to communicate directly with one another.
Walkie-talkies and wireless mesh networks? Oh please. We need the cell phone towers and the internet backbone to make it work.
It's better trying to create a network within the network. Instead of sending an email, you use $random open source message/file transfer system.
What worries me is the continous location they'll keep on my cell phone (most smart phones communicate all the time to check for mail etc), that I really don't see an easy way to avoid.
Most likely the one who steps up will fail exactly because he's not Steve Jobs, no matter what he does. What Apple has done is to overcome the catch 22 of users and content because Jobs has a following of rabid fans and loyal developers big enough to kick start any market. It's like setting off a nuke, you need critical mass or you get a fizzle.
Jobs has the customers go "yeah" then the developers go "yeah" then the tech press goes "yeah" and the cheers runs in circles. The next guy will have the customers go "ummmmmm" then the developers go "ummmmmm" then the tech press goes "ummmmmmm" and the doubt runs in circles. Apple can spiral down just as quick as they've spiraled up.
You omitted the "license requires" part, which makes it quite different. The source code of a BSD app may be disclosed, but it's not required by the BSD license. While open source is typically redistributed at no cost, it's not a requirement of the license.
So there's no problem with BSD apps or freeware. The only one with teeth is (ii), which bans all libraries, engines and copyleft licenses but for an end user store only copyleft is really relevant. So it's basically down to (L)GPL, CDDL and maybe a few more that are banned.
* speaking of plugins, they are not considered GPL-able software despite many of them existing with GPL licenses - I suggested adding it during v3 ratification, but they did not feel there was a need (there are several clauses that make them not applicable), so if you write GPL plugins, I suggest moving to another license because the one you're using is not valid.
Bullshit. Worst case you've created an impossible situation where you can't legally use the plug-in, but the license on the source itself is as valid as any other. If I take any source from your plugin to use in my completely unrelated project, the GPL applies. The FSF also has several questions in the FAQ about this, so I don't know where you ever got your ideas from.
Again, you'd have to expect the software to get many times faster.
I don't think that's an unreasonable assumption though, parsing a natural sentence into computer logic seems like a very hard problem. Languages are full of idiosyncrasies, ambiguities, implied context, fuzzy definitions and subtly changing meaning.
Let's for example take "named after", and that you can properly parse the sentence to find "name" is a transitive verb and "after" is a preposition. That narrows it down to 5 and 12 meanings respectively:
tr.v. named, namÂing, names
1. To give a name to: named the child after both grandparents.
2. To mention, specify, or cite by name: named the primary colors.
3. To call by an epithet: named them all cowards.
4. To nominate for or appoint to a duty, an office, or an honor. See Synonyms at appoint.
5. To specify or fix: We need to name the time for our meeting.
adj. Informal
Well-known by a name: a name performer.
â" prep
1. following in time; in succession to: after dinner ; time after time
2. following; behind: they entered one after another
3. in pursuit or search of: chasing after a thief ; he's only after money
4. concerning: to inquire after his health
5. considering: after what you have done, you shouldn't complain
6. next in excellence or importance to: he ranked Jonson after Shakespeare
7. in imitation of; in the manner of: a statue after classical models
8. in accordance with or in conformity to: a man after her own heart
9. with a name derived from: Mary was named after her grandmother
10. ( US ) past (the hour of): twenty after three
11. after all
a. in spite of everything: it's only a game, after all
b. in spite of expectations, efforts, etc: he won the race after all!
12. after you please go, enter, etc, before me
You can spend lots of power trying to brute force score it into 5*12 possible combinations. Or you could ignore human word boundaries and make "named after" a phrase with a specific meaning. I imagine that by special casing such constructs you could improve performance immensely.
The better question is if it'll create a backlash or even more of a "OMG the pedos are everywhere, think of the children" stampede. Remember, the police have no interest in downplaying the threat and their budgets and there's a molester lurking on every corner of the intertubes. It's like all their "crushing blows", there always seem to be people left for more blows.
No. HDV is 1440x1080i at maximum, but 1440p refers to the vertical resolution. 2560x1440 is not a very common resolution but found in monitors like Dell UltraSharp U2711, Apple LED Cinema Display 27 and Nec NEC SpectraView Reference 271W. You'll have an easier time finding ice cream in Sahara than native 1440p content though.
Thing is when it gets to a production model - will batteries cope with a dual core phone? A lot of current phones have problems especially with low signal areas draining the batteries regardless of 'optimum' conditions they tend to use when stating battery life.
Well, the question is how much signal strength will matter at all. I play many games on my iPhone that are relatively CPU/GPU intense as opposed to communication intense. I can easily play Angry Birds in flight mode, sure from time to time I want to compare my scores online but it's mostly irrelevant to short time use. From laptops we know that higher power CPUs often means it executes faster and returns to sleep stages faster. Obviously if games continues to max the hardware we'll see shorter battery lives but the same games may end up lasting longer on a more powerful phone than a less powerful one. I at least know with myself that I often trade battery life for gaming because I know I'm on a 4-8 hour trip with a socket to charge it with at the end. If you can give me a more flexible device with better gaming for those hours, I'm all for it even though if total battery life sucks in that mode.
I thought iTunes did that?
I live in Norway, we got zero video on iTunes of any kind.
So now Microsoft can put me on the untrusted database for using linux and banks will not want to give me a loan. I'm so building my next computer from scratch.
Nobody will stop you from NOT getting a certificate by installing an "untrusted" OS on "trusted" hardware and you probably won't get non-trusted hardware just like you can't get a monitor without HDCP (over DVI/HDMI/DP) or a DVD/BluRay player without CSS/AACS.
The point is that they're pushing to make this a requirement for using any major corporate or government service and turn you into a digital caveman. You will get a top-to-bottom locked down system because it's the only thing that'll work. And because it's signed all the way down to hardware, your Linux box will never be able to reverse engineer or emulate it. It's the One Microsoft Way or the highway.
Cost and availability of bandwidth varies extremely much depending on where you are and by what way you're connected. I recently bought Fifa 11 for my iPhone (1$ sale on valentine's day, massive bang for the buck) and it was 800 MB+, way more than my 500 MB/month quota. There is an unlimited plan but it costs hellishly much and the phone doesn't let you download apps over 20 MB via 3G anyway. Was that a problem? No, because i downloaded it over my wifi which is hooked up to a 25 Mbit line with no quota.
While it is in range of my wifi, I wouldn't mind if it loaded up on content I'd want to watch. I just don't think there's any automated system intelligent enough - or rather clairvoyant enough - to actually be useful. I could see it for stuff I was subscribed to, like "When there's a new episode of the Simpsons and I'm on wifi then automatically predownload" sort of thing but not in general. That is, if such a service existed.
It's almost no point in looking at prices, almost all the cost is in the R&D and the price is determined pretty much only by the consumers and the competition. What matters for the long term survivability are the margins and if they're big enough to fund future R&D. Otherwise Intel will very soon be putting out chips that are faster, cheaper and lower power at prices AMD can't turn a profit at all.
The only reason Intel doesn't stomp AMD out of the market (except anti-trust) is because dropping their prices that low would hurt their profits. Even when AMD does their design better than Intel like when they were doing Netburst and Itanic then the huge lead time and investment cost means AMD can't swoop in and take the market. They would have to bet billions up front in plants and capacity on the belief that Fusion will be a killer, if it does only average or if Intel pulls a similar ace out of the hole then AMD is done for.
I think AMD would only be "used up" by Dell. Put in computers as long as they're profitable to produce without much R&D, then end up with an outdated technology that's not worth producing.