Come drive on I-495 in Massachusetts. The speed limit is 65, but you can go 85-90 without any fear of getting a ticket. The state troopers are kept plenty busy by people driving over 100mph to be worried about people in the double digits.
I don't see why this tech would prevent you from upgrading your TiVo hardware, even if you copied the data over. You could still only "read" (playback) the data on the TiVo itself.
Some series 2 TiVos lock the disk in such a way that to upgrade you need to boot up the TiVo to have it unlock the drive, and then move the drive to your PC while it is still powered up. I had to do this with my second TiVo, but not with my Series 3. I don't know if that's the stuff from this patent, but I wouldn't be surprised.
Also, yes, you can read the data stored on it. That doesn't mean you own the data or that the vendor is required to give you the decryption key, or that you can redistribute and copy it as you please.
Sure, most of the patents will be exposed as being crud that isn't worth patenting or just simply isn't being violated as Microsoft claims, but some of it will stick. The court will award Microsoft $X million for the violation and then [...]
You had me until the end there. In reality the company will settle, or Microsoft will lose the case. You are not violating a patent if you use a device that is covered but not licensed. It is the person/company that made the device that is in violation.
I've had MythTV and Tivo in actual use, and I've tried the SageTV demo. I've been using DVRs and DVR software since 1998. I've written custom code and submitted patches. I've done hardware mods to satellite receivers to be able to extract raw digital signal.
HD is becoming more and more common. The average user will care about HD soon if they don't already. This encryption, however, will continue to be a non-issue. If you don't have HD, sure, Sage or Myth will work just fine for you (though they won't be cheaper, and involve much more maintenence). Eventually, though, the typical user will end up with HD. Now given a user that picks Myth/Sage and a user that picks Tivo, which is more likely: The Tivo user being encumbered by the inability to extract video from a hard drive removed from a box they'll probably never open, or the Myth/Sage user being unable to record some HD content that they want?
If you don't care about HD, why are you even responding to my comment? Are you just trying to troll? Are you expecting me to take the bait and argue with you about a point I wasn't making? Why do people feel the need to attack anybody who says something positive about TiVo? Have you considered that people say good things about it simply because it works well, and not because they've been brainwashed? Please. Tell me what your point is if it's not simply trolling.
Whatever technology is in this patent is almost certainly already in the Series 2 TiVos, as this patent was actually filed ages ago. It's not like the tech doesn't exist until the patent is issued and now all new TiVos are going to be crippled or something.
Sure, maybe they're too expensive (though they're basically the only device that does what they do right now), and it sucks that MRV and such don't work (though it should work soon), but this isn't another anything. All it was is the patent office issuing a patent on something from years ago.
Also, if you honestly think that data belongs to you simply because you own the physical medium, you're in for a serious shock when you use any other electronic device. Content distributors, software companies, and even Richard Stallman would beg to differ.
Oh, here we go with another person that has no clue what they're talking about saying that Sage and Myth are better than / cheaper than / equivalent to a TiVo.
Here's the deal. The only HD content you can get with MythTV and SageTV are unencrypted broadcasts. For 99% of people that means whatever they can get OTA by antenna (or those same channels re-broadcast by their cable company). Yes, all 10 people in the entire world who can get every channel from the firewire port of their unhacked cable box will respond to this comment saying that they get everything, but that's all of them. Everybody else in the US can only get CBS, ABC, NBC, PBS, and Fox in HD on their non-TiVo DVR.
Not only that, but a TiVo (especially the ones with the built in DVD recorders) already does everything that the average user cares about. Having the content stored without encryption on the hard drive is something that wouldn't change the user experience one bit for most users; even advanced users.
Read your own link. A Zero-day exploit is a exploit that is available on the same day as, or before the vulnerability is made public. If you wait until post-patch wednesday to announce the vulnerability you discovered and release an exploit, your exploit will probably be zero-day for quite a while.
You get to go home sick because of a migraine and you're complaining?
If you aren't contagious, working isn't going to make you worse, and your condition isn't going to stop you from doing your job properly (more slowly doesn't count), perhaps you should be at work.
There's way more wrong with this analysis than that. For starters, to my knowledge there has never been documented evidence of iSuppli producing credible numbers, but plenty of examples where they were completely wrong. Next, let's look at the numbers from the article a little more closely:
Assembly: Xbox 360 - $6.10 (How can they be so precise? Direct Microsoft involvement perhaps?) PS3 - $40 (What, no cents?)
How can anybody possibly believe that it costs $40 to assemble a PS3? That number doesn't even pass the laugh test. Can you imagine some underpaid Asian or South American worker spending days assembling a single PS3? I certainly can't. They've got $61.75 listed for the chassis. I'm going to call bullshit on that one too.
If the numbers aren't that high to begin with, they can't fall as far as they're saying. If they can't fall that far, there can't be a price cut...
It's been my experience that only employees who have earned a level of distrust (of haven't been at a job long enough to earn a level of trust) get such treatment.
Of course, the generation that is currently coming of working age never learned how to treat their elders with respect, so many of them will never earn that trust. That's their own damned fault though.
I'm all for affordable health insurance for everyone but I oppose mandated nation healthcare run by the government.
The only way to make health care more affordable is to get people to stop consuming health care for trivial issues (My baby sneezed.... I've got a sore throat/cold/the flu.. etc..). Making health care "free" isn't going to do that. If anything it would do the opposite.
Look at Iraq for an obvious example. Look at wholesale rollback of environmental protection laws. Look at the merging of church and state. Look at the radical shift in priorities at the Justice Department. Look at massive government spending coupled with tax cuts. They've kept abortion in limbo because they know once they win that battle they'll lose the war. They're simply torn on immigration, because big business wants more of it, and the social conservatives want less of it.
With the exception of Iraq (which they probably wouldn't have attempted if not for 9/11), and the tax cuts, you've listed a whole lot of nothing. There has been more posturing than action in almost everything you listed. The Justice Department stuff is the same stuff that happens with every party change in the top seat, and doesn't actually change the law. The spending is horrid, but it was pandering to the social conservatives (read: ex-democrats who are pro-life); it only happened because the Democrats wanted to spend the money too. And you've already conceded the points on immigration and abortion.
You're right. The Democrats and Republicans have different policy goals (and the Bush administration seems to have yet a third set of goals that differs from the Republican base), but my point wasn't that they have the same goals. It was more that it pays to keep them as goals rather than to actually take action.
I disagree that the Republicans are facing payback for their actions right now. They're facing payback for double-talk, corruption, really really poor strategic decision making in the war, and to some extent really good counter-PR for things like Katrina. And despite all that the American public will still elect another Republican president in 2008 if the Democrats choose Hillary as their candidate, because she will take action on her policy goals. It is not a coincidence that we elected three very weak (when they came onto the scene) presidents in a row.
The Republican Party had control of the House, the Senate, and the White House for almost six years and didn't change American immigration policy.
Yeah, that's the CNN version of events... In real life there's a big-ass metal wall along the border in places where there are abutting communities that wasn't there before. Just long enough to look like they're doing something, and just short enough so that people can go around it.
The currently empowered group calling themselves "republicans" want exactly the same thing that the group calling themselves "democrats" wants. They want to keep divisive issues on the table so they can use them to hold/gain power. You better re-check you 'iron law of politics'. This is a new age. The new law is "if you use it you lose it", so you may as well angle for the fat Washington paycheck and be a whore for the spotlight instead.
But having broken up with a confessed serial killer who previously sued your ex-husband and allegedly (according to Reiser) has previously threatened both your husband, children and your husbands mother, certainly will create reasonable doubt unless they have some pretty damning evidence.
I agree with everything you said except the "reasonable" part. By that I mean, if the evidence all says he did it, the fact that this other killer is in the picture isn't justification for an acquittal. It creats doubt, but by itself it isn't enough. Now if the defense can present reasonable explanations as to how this other guy may have tampered with or planted the evidence, that's another story entirely.
I'm not mis-representing anything. I don't have an opinion either way in this particular case. I'm just saying that if the prosecutor feels the evidence points to somebody, that person should be tried, regardless of whether the victim had a relationship with another killer.
a rationale something like a longer password being easier to crack.
The rationale was compatibility with other UNIX-like systems, but it went away when MD5 hashing became popular and PAM was introduced. By 1998 most Linux distributions had already switched (but probably not Slackware). The rest all had it as an option. If you have a linux system today that you've upgraded repeatedly since back then (or kept the passwd/shadow files), you probably *still* have the limitation unless you forced your existing users to change their password.
nd you have the privilege to live your life without it being prematurely ended by another person. It is not a right. The privilege can be taken aaway at the whim of a plurality of the citizens.
You're wrong.
There is no way for a plurality of the citizens to take away your drive to stay alive. It is an irrevocable right that did not need to be granted to you. That right can be violated by individuals or by the government if they kill you, but it is your right none the less. In contrast, the ability to charge for copies of your intellectual work was something you didn't have until it was granted you by the government (and thus its citizens). It truly is a whim.
congress doesn't respond to the input of the citizens
It certainly does, but citizens don't provide feedback (vote for somebody else). They merely rubber stamp (vote for) the candidate that spends the most on advertising and paints their lawn signs the color the voters mommies and daddies told them was the right, proper color.
there is nothing imaginery about the fact that if you work for years producing some digital content, you have the right to decide what to charge for it.
You have the privilege to charge what you'd like for it as granted to you by the law of the land. It is not a right. The privilege can be taken away at the whim of a plurality of the citizens.
I guess the submitter would prefer it if the whole concept of copyright and IP did not exist, but I wouldn't get your hopes up for any new movies, TV, music, softwre or games in that case.
I think you would be surprised on both of those assertions. The submitter would probably prefer that copyright law was more limited rather than being eliminated entirely. There would also still probably be plenty of media produced. Somebody would figure out how to make money from it anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
Come drive on I-495 in Massachusetts. The speed limit is 65, but you can go 85-90 without any fear of getting a ticket. The state troopers are kept plenty busy by people driving over 100mph to be worried about people in the double digits.
The USPTO gets paid the same amount for your application even if they reject your patent.
I don't see why this tech would prevent you from upgrading your TiVo hardware, even if you copied the data over. You could still only "read" (playback) the data on the TiVo itself.
Some series 2 TiVos lock the disk in such a way that to upgrade you need to boot up the TiVo to have it unlock the drive, and then move the drive to your PC while it is still powered up. I had to do this with my second TiVo, but not with my Series 3. I don't know if that's the stuff from this patent, but I wouldn't be surprised.
Also, yes, you can read the data stored on it. That doesn't mean you own the data or that the vendor is required to give you the decryption key, or that you can redistribute and copy it as you please.
You had me until the end there. In reality the company will settle, or Microsoft will lose the case. You are not violating a patent if you use a device that is covered but not licensed. It is the person/company that made the device that is in violation.
I've had MythTV and Tivo in actual use, and I've tried the SageTV demo. I've been using DVRs and DVR software since 1998. I've written custom code and submitted patches. I've done hardware mods to satellite receivers to be able to extract raw digital signal.
HD is becoming more and more common. The average user will care about HD soon if they don't already. This encryption, however, will continue to be a non-issue. If you don't have HD, sure, Sage or Myth will work just fine for you (though they won't be cheaper, and involve much more maintenence). Eventually, though, the typical user will end up with HD. Now given a user that picks Myth/Sage and a user that picks Tivo, which is more likely: The Tivo user being encumbered by the inability to extract video from a hard drive removed from a box they'll probably never open, or the Myth/Sage user being unable to record some HD content that they want?
If you don't care about HD, why are you even responding to my comment? Are you just trying to troll? Are you expecting me to take the bait and argue with you about a point I wasn't making? Why do people feel the need to attack anybody who says something positive about TiVo? Have you considered that people say good things about it simply because it works well, and not because they've been brainwashed? Please. Tell me what your point is if it's not simply trolling.
Whatever technology is in this patent is almost certainly already in the Series 2 TiVos, as this patent was actually filed ages ago. It's not like the tech doesn't exist until the patent is issued and now all new TiVos are going to be crippled or something.
Sure, maybe they're too expensive (though they're basically the only device that does what they do right now), and it sucks that MRV and such don't work (though it should work soon), but this isn't another anything. All it was is the patent office issuing a patent on something from years ago.
Also, if you honestly think that data belongs to you simply because you own the physical medium, you're in for a serious shock when you use any other electronic device. Content distributors, software companies, and even Richard Stallman would beg to differ.
Oh, here we go with another person that has no clue what they're talking about saying that Sage and Myth are better than / cheaper than / equivalent to a TiVo.
Here's the deal. The only HD content you can get with MythTV and SageTV are unencrypted broadcasts. For 99% of people that means whatever they can get OTA by antenna (or those same channels re-broadcast by their cable company). Yes, all 10 people in the entire world who can get every channel from the firewire port of their unhacked cable box will respond to this comment saying that they get everything, but that's all of them. Everybody else in the US can only get CBS, ABC, NBC, PBS, and Fox in HD on their non-TiVo DVR.
Not only that, but a TiVo (especially the ones with the built in DVD recorders) already does everything that the average user cares about. Having the content stored without encryption on the hard drive is something that wouldn't change the user experience one bit for most users; even advanced users.
Read your own link. A Zero-day exploit is a exploit that is available on the same day as, or before the vulnerability is made public. If you wait until post-patch wednesday to announce the vulnerability you discovered and release an exploit, your exploit will probably be zero-day for quite a while.
So... You agree with me, and the joke went over your head? Excellent.
Patch Tuesday - AKA: The day before the zero-day exploits are released.
You get to go home sick because of a migraine and you're complaining?
If you aren't contagious, working isn't going to make you worse, and your condition isn't going to stop you from doing your job properly (more slowly doesn't count), perhaps you should be at work.
There's way more wrong with this analysis than that. For starters, to my knowledge there has never been documented evidence of iSuppli producing credible numbers, but plenty of examples where they were completely wrong. Next, let's look at the numbers from the article a little more closely:
Assembly:
Xbox 360 - $6.10 (How can they be so precise? Direct Microsoft involvement perhaps?)
PS3 - $40 (What, no cents?)
How can anybody possibly believe that it costs $40 to assemble a PS3? That number doesn't even pass the laugh test. Can you imagine some underpaid Asian or South American worker spending days assembling a single PS3? I certainly can't. They've got $61.75 listed for the chassis. I'm going to call bullshit on that one too.
If the numbers aren't that high to begin with, they can't fall as far as they're saying. If they can't fall that far, there can't be a price cut...
Where do you work?
It's been my experience that only employees who have earned a level of distrust (of haven't been at a job long enough to earn a level of trust) get such treatment.
Of course, the generation that is currently coming of working age never learned how to treat their elders with respect, so many of them will never earn that trust. That's their own damned fault though.
The only way to make health care more affordable is to get people to stop consuming health care for trivial issues (My baby sneezed.... I've got a sore throat/cold/the flu.. etc..). Making health care "free" isn't going to do that. If anything it would do the opposite.
I was going to post exactly that, and I'm pleased to find somebody beat me to it.
I'll second gcc, but I'd take perl+Firefox in a pinch.
With the exception of Iraq (which they probably wouldn't have attempted if not for 9/11), and the tax cuts, you've listed a whole lot of nothing. There has been more posturing than action in almost everything you listed. The Justice Department stuff is the same stuff that happens with every party change in the top seat, and doesn't actually change the law. The spending is horrid, but it was pandering to the social conservatives (read: ex-democrats who are pro-life); it only happened because the Democrats wanted to spend the money too. And you've already conceded the points on immigration and abortion.
You're right. The Democrats and Republicans have different policy goals (and the Bush administration seems to have yet a third set of goals that differs from the Republican base), but my point wasn't that they have the same goals. It was more that it pays to keep them as goals rather than to actually take action.
I disagree that the Republicans are facing payback for their actions right now. They're facing payback for double-talk, corruption, really really poor strategic decision making in the war, and to some extent really good counter-PR for things like Katrina. And despite all that the American public will still elect another Republican president in 2008 if the Democrats choose Hillary as their candidate, because she will take action on her policy goals. It is not a coincidence that we elected three very weak (when they came onto the scene) presidents in a row.
Yeah, that's the CNN version of events... In real life there's a big-ass metal wall along the border in places where there are abutting communities that wasn't there before. Just long enough to look like they're doing something, and just short enough so that people can go around it.
The currently empowered group calling themselves "republicans" want exactly the same thing that the group calling themselves "democrats" wants. They want to keep divisive issues on the table so they can use them to hold/gain power. You better re-check you 'iron law of politics'. This is a new age. The new law is "if you use it you lose it", so you may as well angle for the fat Washington paycheck and be a whore for the spotlight instead.
I agree with everything you said except the "reasonable" part. By that I mean, if the evidence all says he did it, the fact that this other killer is in the picture isn't justification for an acquittal. It creats doubt, but by itself it isn't enough. Now if the defense can present reasonable explanations as to how this other guy may have tampered with or planted the evidence, that's another story entirely.
I'm not mis-representing anything. I don't have an opinion either way in this particular case. I'm just saying that if the prosecutor feels the evidence points to somebody, that person should be tried, regardless of whether the victim had a relationship with another killer.
The rationale was compatibility with other UNIX-like systems, but it went away when MD5 hashing became popular and PAM was introduced. By 1998 most Linux distributions had already switched (but probably not Slackware). The rest all had it as an option. If you have a linux system today that you've upgraded repeatedly since back then (or kept the passwd/shadow files), you probably *still* have the limitation unless you forced your existing users to change their password.
You're right. Everybody should be able to get away with murder if their victim knows a confessed killer...
Wait... What?
Doubting that somebody is guilty simply because the victim knew somebody who committed the same type of crime sounds like unreasonable doubt to me.
You're wrong.
There is no way for a plurality of the citizens to take away your drive to stay alive. It is an irrevocable right that did not need to be granted to you. That right can be violated by individuals or by the government if they kill you, but it is your right none the less. In contrast, the ability to charge for copies of your intellectual work was something you didn't have until it was granted you by the government (and thus its citizens). It truly is a whim.
It certainly does, but citizens don't provide feedback (vote for somebody else). They merely rubber stamp (vote for) the candidate that spends the most on advertising and paints their lawn signs the color the voters mommies and daddies told them was the right, proper color.
You have the privilege to charge what you'd like for it as granted to you by the law of the land. It is not a right. The privilege can be taken away at the whim of a plurality of the citizens.
I think you would be surprised on both of those assertions. The submitter would probably prefer that copyright law was more limited rather than being eliminated entirely. There would also still probably be plenty of media produced. Somebody would figure out how to make money from it anyway.
Like the Corn Field?