How much are you willing to pay for it? Me? I'm not willing to pay at all. The only video content I'm willing to pay for comes on a physical media that I can use as many times as I want. Let them implement the standards. Let them stake the industry on it. They'll see how few people pony up the cash. People don't care about quality anymore when it affects their wallet. See MP3s. Somehow all of these media companies got this idea that if the latest technology required people to fork over cash for things that they used to get for free then everyone would just do it. That's a really poor assumption to gamble an industry on. How many people do you know that subscribed to digital cable stereo? Have XM car stereos? Bought movies on DivX? Make sure you express your answer as a percentage of people that listen to music/watch movies.
Once all the media giants are gone because the didn't "get it" then we can start anew.
The panasonic drive acts like a standard block device under linux, and you can use mkfs on it and mount it read-write. What better software can there be but your shell.
Even better, go to sourceforge and get the linux-udf tools. You can still mount it the standard way, and then everyone else will be able to read your disc too.
Oh, yeah, and the Panasonic drive has been around for 2 years now.
I'm missing the reason you can't do all that with 802.11
Also, with the short range limits on Bluetooth, you better have a pretty small house if you want to do all of that stuff.
Re:Is it live or is it wearing concrete overshoes
on
Mob Software
·
· Score: 2
And those ways just happen to not be conducive to creating software.
Exactly. Software creation requires that the initial framework and interaction between portions agree. How is a loosely formed mob going to get the project off the ground? A mob never forms without someone starting it. After the project gets off the ground, how do you coordinate two people doing the same thing. in an unruly mob, if two people are throwing rocks, it's fine. In, say, an SMP operating system, if two entities are managing locks, the system crashes.
Software needs structure. A structured group needs to manage the software's structure. Mobs have no structure.
Imagine this: Some random large company suddenly finds that they have 100x the cash on hand of any of any company that makes profitable product 'X', which is almost completely unrelated to their original core business. Product 'X' has great promise in the marketspace, so thinking long term they decide to blow all that extra cash to make a virtualy identacal product 'X'. Not only do they give their product 'X' away for 'free', they force everyone to have one by gluing it to the side of their already succesfult product that everyone *needs* to buy, so that it is completely pointless to purchase a product 'X' from anyone else. The other product 'X' companies' demise is guaranteed. Sure, this might seem harmless, and you might think it should be perfectly legal, hell they have the money they should be able to spend it how they want, right? What if you later found out that their motives were to put all the other companies that make product 'X' out of business so that they could then vastly overcharge you for product 'X' once you have nowhere else to go. They could then more then double that original cash pile, and then find some other lucrative product, glue that on too, and start the cycle over again.
This can't be allowed for many reasons. First the consumers of product 'X' are harmed. They loose choice, and demand no longer has any effect on price. Also there is no incentive to improve or maintain the quality of product 'X'. Marketplace innovation is stifled. Secondly, there is no incentive for new companies to go into business to create other new innovative products if there is any chance that this random large company could glue an identical product onto theirs. Innovation is further stifled, the business marketplace and economy suffers, and the consumer gets fewer new innovative products. It's unfortunate that something so subjective like fairness has to be enforced, but to some extent the system has to enforce fairness as a form of self preservation. Plus it's the freedom of individuals that matters, not the freedom of companies, right? You need to enforce a level of "fairness" on competition between companies to guarantee the freedoms of individuals.
I don't know anything about the particular situation you are talking about, but I do know that you can netboot a very large number of machines from a single boot server in very little time given a UNIX like OS, a shell, and gigabit connectivity. All of which the G4 Macs have. Just run a TFTP server and change the environment variables in Open Firmware. Though they may have faked it, I don't see why they would have. It seems trivial to implement. (I do it here, but I have Linux on my Macs instead of OSX of course:)
I also own a TiVo, and I agree. It is unfortunate though. I used to spend over $700 a year going to see movies in the theater, and now it just doesn't seem worthwhile. There was always something that was just better about going to see a movie on the big screen, but now the whole experience seems less attractive. Oh well.
Bleh. So many games that implement >2 players on consoles suck. There are a select few exceptions, and good games do bother to support the extra hardware. I'm sorry, but if you divide up the TV screen, it sucks. Gauntlet Dark Legacy and Cookie & Cream for the PS2 do a great job of multi player with a multitap. If you like the divide up the screen aproach, there are lots of those games available too. (Even with the need for a multi tap). Putting four ports on the front of the machine only makes the people who don't want >2 players (The majority if the number of >2 player games is any indication) pay for the extra ports either way. The future of multi player on consoles is network gaming anyway. As soon as broadband is widely available, you'll be plaing with hundreds of others with only one controler port. Post college you don't have a bunch of "lamely-nicknamed punks" around your house to "hand your ass to you" after work anyway, but you do have plenty of money to go out and buy games with.
And what's this crap about a PSX "vibe"? And this other crap about PC's not having good multi player? (Ever played Quake?)
It's interesting that their precooked demo's sound great, but the speach generated in the interactive demo still sounds like a classic text-to-speech program with a few enhancements. This doesn't seem like a significant improvement over, say, what ships with MacOS by default. I'm not impressed.
This is going off on a tangent, but I can't help it.
I went to see Tomb Raider (don't laugh) at the cinema, and with the exception of one awful haircare related advert, I actually didn't mind sitting through them.
Didn't it piss you off that you had to sit through advertising before seeing a movie that you paid to get into. They already got their money for you being there, and they're selling your time! I haven't been to a movie in 2 years since they started doing this. If they're going to make money off of me then the shouldn't charge so much for me to get in. And the money I saved has bought me a huge TV and the movies on DVD sans adverts. The huge TV and the surround sound still isn't quite as good as going to see the movie in the theater though. I just can't bring myself to go. Damn, that just pisses me off!
redbook is the standard for how data is stored on the disk. The data is stored properly, it's just corrupted first. The disk should still conform to the standard.
All circumstances you have mentioned in your post are 100% non-compilance with a law. They are not 99% compliant in any way. However, napster just has to have substantial non-infringing uses beyond it's infringing use to be in 100% compilance with the law. So if they manage to block 99% of the infringing use and the majority of the remaining use is non infringing, then they are compilant with the law. 100% compilant, not 99% compilant. The percentage of infringing use that they block does not magically translate into a percentage of compliance with the law as you suggest. This ruling seems to make new law, instead of enforcing the laws on the books.
Now who do you think people are going to buy the software from. Me, who wrote the code, and actually can support it, or Company X, who downloaded the code, doesn't know shit about it, and just wants to make a quick buck.
The answer is: The company who has the most money to market the software with. (Assuming the software is any good.) The people who know enough about the process to know that Company X just took the code are going to be smart enough to just take the code themselves, and aren't going to give either of you a dime anyway.
If you ever hope to sell your code for a profit, neither the GPL nor the BSD license are good choices.
Re:Make a decision, folks
on
ORBS Forks
·
· Score: 2
I am against the censorship of this list of open relays. Don't forget to look both ways next time you cross the street.
Two things, The problem isn't jsut horizontal... Load a large image and scroll left to right, and you'll see what I mean.
The other thing is, on the three machines I have it only happens on one of them. The machine it happens on has XFree 4.0.3 and a TNT2, while the other two have XFree 4.0.2 one with an ATI Rage pro and the other with a Matrox something or other.... Maybe it isn't a Mozilla bug.
You make it sound like they're attaching a huge object to the bottom of a kite and flying it around. They're not, they're pulling on ropes with the kites, and the ropes go through a pully system on a firmly anchored scaffold. How is that dangerous?
Where did the argument of who is farther ahead come into this? Microsoft has been around for 15 more years then linux. They've had plenty of time to "get ahead." The point is that Linux and the aplications that run on it are moving forward faster then microsoft and their applications are. This, in theory, means that linux will pass microsoft eventually.
Not only that, but Linux has pased microsoft in several key areas already.
I don't think he said that the RIAA was going to go away, but that if you want a career as a musician, than you're screwed if you sign with an RIAA member. They may continue to make billions, but they're not interested in keeping a musician around for more then a few years anymore.
we will still get blocked from our cookies, because the default setting doesn't allow 3rd party cookies
we don't do anything "bad" with the cookies we collect
Why don't you just stop using cookies then? Really, what nessicary functionality can't you implement on the server side for advertising that you need to use cookies for? You should be able to do all of the standard things. (Keep statistics, don't show people the same ad over and over. Track consumer preferences for targeted ads... The works.) Not only that, but when you store data in a cookie, your data is at the user's mercy. the cookie file can get cleared at any given time. If it's on your server, you have control over it.
If you're clever, you can even keep track of the data on the server when the user's dynamic IP address changes by keeping other information like the user agent string and what "block" of dynamic IPs the address is assigned from. If the user views more then one page from a particular site, you can seed the links with more information collected through javascript that will get sent to you when the user follows a link. Make a little (1x1) flash program that sends you some data. Really all of this cookie nonsense is just that. Nonsense. You can be so much more evil without cookies because the user can't tell you're doing it once they've left the page.
I want the ability to set up my browser so that sites cannot open new browser windows.
That's not good enough. It removes too much functionality. What you really need is something like sites can only open a new window in response to a click, and it can only be one new window. Also, the window.close() functionality should be disablable. I don't want anything to happen when I close the window except for the window to close. Nothingever.
BTW, Konqueror does all the things you asked for except the image filtering by size. You don't seem to run a *nix variant though, so it won't help you for now. You should consider debian on your Mac.
Slashdot Mirror
How much are you willing to pay for it? Me? I'm not willing to pay at all. The only video content I'm willing to pay for comes on a physical media that I can use as many times as I want. Let them implement the standards. Let them stake the industry on it. They'll see how few people pony up the cash. People don't care about quality anymore when it affects their wallet. See MP3s. Somehow all of these media companies got this idea that if the latest technology required people to fork over cash for things that they used to get for free then everyone would just do it. That's a really poor assumption to gamble an industry on. How many people do you know that subscribed to digital cable stereo? Have XM car stereos? Bought movies on DivX? Make sure you express your answer as a percentage of people that listen to music/watch movies.
Once all the media giants are gone because the didn't "get it" then we can start anew.
IBM and Motorola are competitors in the PowerPC market. C|Net was obviously just parroting the press release. Why would IBM mention their competitor?
The panasonic drive acts like a standard block device under linux, and you can use mkfs on it and mount it read-write. What better software can there be but your shell.
Even better, go to sourceforge and get the linux-udf tools. You can still mount it the standard way, and then everyone else will be able to read your disc too.
Oh, yeah, and the Panasonic drive has been around for 2 years now.
I'm missing the reason you can't do all that with 802.11
Also, with the short range limits on Bluetooth, you better have a pretty small house if you want to do all of that stuff.
And those ways just happen to not be conducive to creating software.
Exactly. Software creation requires that the initial framework and interaction between portions agree. How is a loosely formed mob going to get the project off the ground? A mob never forms without someone starting it. After the project gets off the ground, how do you coordinate two people doing the same thing. in an unruly mob, if two people are throwing rocks, it's fine. In, say, an SMP operating system, if two entities are managing locks, the system crashes.
Software needs structure. A structured group needs to manage the software's structure. Mobs have no structure.
Imagine this: Some random large company suddenly finds that they have 100x the cash on hand of any of any company that makes profitable product 'X', which is almost completely unrelated to their original core business. Product 'X' has great promise in the marketspace, so thinking long term they decide to blow all that extra cash to make a virtualy identacal product 'X'. Not only do they give their product 'X' away for 'free', they force everyone to have one by gluing it to the side of their already succesfult product that everyone *needs* to buy, so that it is completely pointless to purchase a product 'X' from anyone else. The other product 'X' companies' demise is guaranteed. Sure, this might seem harmless, and you might think it should be perfectly legal, hell they have the money they should be able to spend it how they want, right? What if you later found out that their motives were to put all the other companies that make product 'X' out of business so that they could then vastly overcharge you for product 'X' once you have nowhere else to go. They could then more then double that original cash pile, and then find some other lucrative product, glue that on too, and start the cycle over again.
This can't be allowed for many reasons. First the consumers of product 'X' are harmed. They loose choice, and demand no longer has any effect on price. Also there is no incentive to improve or maintain the quality of product 'X'. Marketplace innovation is stifled. Secondly, there is no incentive for new companies to go into business to create other new innovative products if there is any chance that this random large company could glue an identical product onto theirs. Innovation is further stifled, the business marketplace and economy suffers, and the consumer gets fewer new innovative products. It's unfortunate that something so subjective like fairness has to be enforced, but to some extent the system has to enforce fairness as a form of self preservation. Plus it's the freedom of individuals that matters, not the freedom of companies, right? You need to enforce a level of "fairness" on competition between companies to guarantee the freedoms of individuals.
I don't know anything about the particular situation you are talking about, but I do know that you can netboot a very large number of machines from a single boot server in very little time given a UNIX like OS, a shell, and gigabit connectivity. All of which the G4 Macs have. Just run a TFTP server and change the environment variables in Open Firmware. Though they may have faked it, I don't see why they would have. It seems trivial to implement. (I do it here, but I have Linux on my Macs instead of OSX of course :)
I also own a TiVo, and I agree. It is unfortunate though. I used to spend over $700 a year going to see movies in the theater, and now it just doesn't seem worthwhile. There was always something that was just better about going to see a movie on the big screen, but now the whole experience seems less attractive. Oh well.
Bleh. So many games that implement >2 players on consoles suck. There are a select few exceptions, and good games do bother to support the extra hardware. I'm sorry, but if you divide up the TV screen, it sucks. Gauntlet Dark Legacy and Cookie & Cream for the PS2 do a great job of multi player with a multitap. If you like the divide up the screen aproach, there are lots of those games available too. (Even with the need for a multi tap). Putting four ports on the front of the machine only makes the people who don't want >2 players (The majority if the number of >2 player games is any indication) pay for the extra ports either way. The future of multi player on consoles is network gaming anyway. As soon as broadband is widely available, you'll be plaing with hundreds of others with only one controler port. Post college you don't have a bunch of "lamely-nicknamed punks" around your house to "hand your ass to you" after work anyway, but you do have plenty of money to go out and buy games with.
And what's this crap about a PSX "vibe"? And this other crap about PC's not having good multi player? (Ever played Quake?)
It's interesting that their precooked demo's sound great, but the speach generated in the interactive demo still sounds like a classic text-to-speech program with a few enhancements. This doesn't seem like a significant improvement over, say, what ships with MacOS by default. I'm not impressed.
Didn't it piss you off that you had to sit through advertising before seeing a movie that you paid to get into. They already got their money for you being there, and they're selling your time! I haven't been to a movie in 2 years since they started doing this. If they're going to make money off of me then the shouldn't charge so much for me to get in. And the money I saved has bought me a huge TV and the movies on DVD sans adverts. The huge TV and the surround sound still isn't quite as good as going to see the movie in the theater though. I just can't bring myself to go. Damn, that just pisses me off!
I'm doing it right now.
redbook is the standard for how data is stored on the disk. The data is stored properly, it's just corrupted first. The disk should still conform to the standard.
All circumstances you have mentioned in your post are 100% non-compilance with a law. They are not 99% compliant in any way. However, napster just has to have substantial non-infringing uses beyond it's infringing use to be in 100% compilance with the law. So if they manage to block 99% of the infringing use and the majority of the remaining use is non infringing, then they are compilant with the law. 100% compilant, not 99% compilant. The percentage of infringing use that they block does not magically translate into a percentage of compliance with the law as you suggest. This ruling seems to make new law, instead of enforcing the laws on the books.
PS1=$'\\[\\033[34m\\][\\[\\033[1;37m\\]\\@\\[\\033 [34m\\]]\\[\\033[32m\\]\\u\\[\\033[1;37m\\]@\\[\\0 33[31m\\]\\h\\[\\033[1;37m\\]:\\w\\[\\033[34m\\]>\ \ [\\033[0m\\]'
I wonder if they disabled the lameness filter for this story...
Now who do you think people are going to buy the software from. Me, who wrote the code, and actually can support it, or Company X, who downloaded the code, doesn't know shit about it, and just wants to make a quick buck.
The answer is: The company who has the most money to market the software with. (Assuming the software is any good.) The people who know enough about the process to know that Company X just took the code are going to be smart enough to just take the code themselves, and aren't going to give either of you a dime anyway.
If you ever hope to sell your code for a profit, neither the GPL nor the BSD license are good choices.
I am against the censorship of this list of open relays. Don't forget to look both ways next time you cross the street.
Two things, The problem isn't jsut horizontal... Load a large image and scroll left to right, and you'll see what I mean.
The other thing is, on the three machines I have it only happens on one of them. The machine it happens on has XFree 4.0.3 and a TNT2, while the other two have XFree 4.0.2 one with an ATI Rage pro and the other with a Matrox something or other.... Maybe it isn't a Mozilla bug.
I saw the Fuchsia version at Walmart yesterday. They are rediculously UGLY!
http://www.its.caltech.edu/~pelesl/obelisk.html
You make it sound like they're attaching a huge object to the bottom of a kite and flying it around. They're not, they're pulling on ropes with the kites, and the ropes go through a pully system on a firmly anchored scaffold. How is that dangerous?
Where did the argument of who is farther ahead come into this? Microsoft has been around for 15 more years then linux. They've had plenty of time to "get ahead." The point is that Linux and the aplications that run on it are moving forward faster then microsoft and their applications are. This, in theory, means that linux will pass microsoft eventually.
Not only that, but Linux has pased microsoft in several key areas already.
I don't think he said that the RIAA was going to go away, but that if you want a career as a musician, than you're screwed if you sign with an RIAA member. They may continue to make billions, but they're not interested in keeping a musician around for more then a few years anymore.
we will still get blocked from our cookies, because the default setting doesn't allow 3rd party cookies
we don't do anything "bad" with the cookies we collect
Why don't you just stop using cookies then? Really, what nessicary functionality can't you implement on the server side for advertising that you need to use cookies for? You should be able to do all of the standard things. (Keep statistics, don't show people the same ad over and over. Track consumer preferences for targeted ads... The works.) Not only that, but when you store data in a cookie, your data is at the user's mercy. the cookie file can get cleared at any given time. If it's on your server, you have control over it.
If you're clever, you can even keep track of the data on the server when the user's dynamic IP address changes by keeping other information like the user agent string and what "block" of dynamic IPs the address is assigned from. If the user views more then one page from a particular site, you can seed the links with more information collected through javascript that will get sent to you when the user follows a link. Make a little (1x1) flash program that sends you some data. Really all of this cookie nonsense is just that. Nonsense. You can be so much more evil without cookies because the user can't tell you're doing it once they've left the page.
I want the ability to set up my browser so that sites cannot open new browser windows.
That's not good enough. It removes too much functionality. What you really need is something like sites can only open a new window in response to a click, and it can only be one new window. Also, the window.close() functionality should be disablable. I don't want anything to happen when I close the window except for the window to close. Nothing ever .
BTW, Konqueror does all the things you asked for except the image filtering by size. You don't seem to run a *nix variant though, so it won't help you for now. You should consider debian on your Mac.
Which way to the topic again?