I posted another message on my take on the issue, but I don't think I put my perspective clearly enough. Given that it's a single website that the redirection is going through (at least, we can presume it is), it would be piss easy for a big outfit like E-Bay to detect the website name and not include it in any referral monetary program.
So the website is likely to be only usefull as intended - as a means of secretly counting how many Morpheus users visit a particular big site, without going to the trouble of having to enter into an agreement with the popular website owners to get the information. It's sneaky, it sucks, but I don't think that they're really trying to secretly make a few bucks.
From what I gather, it's always a single hardcoded site that the user is redirected to. So I think the original poster is off the mark in thinking that this is a way for the website to make some quick bucks in referrals. However, the issue of secretly redirecting a users browser is still a fairly serious issue to consider, just on privacy grounds. If I type in a URL, I expect it to go that URL, and not to secretly start visiting other websites that I didn't want.
Anyone remember a while ago AOL was detecting URLs for the popular search engines and instead forcing the user to their own search engine page? Is that still going on? That was bad, but at least they were open about it. This case is much worse in that it attempts to conceal what's it's doing
Indeed, let's not forget the case of Vanessa Leggett, the journalist who has already spent over 150 days in jail on contempt of court, because she refused to give up the notes she made whilst writing a crime book.
http://www.dailytexanonline.com/vnews/display.v/ AR T/2001/12/12/3c1811ef479cf is URL for an article describing the case, although just going to Google and doing a search on her name is likely to give you hundreds of URLs:)
After having read the notice, I find myself wondering whether this is really something to worry about. The notice itself is very vague.. only stating that they were forced to give the list to Microsoft, and that Microsoft has promised not to abuse it.
With so few facts, it seems kind of hard to determine whether this is serious or not. Whilst Microsoft are notorious for underhanded tactics, I seriously doubt that they'd use the list of emails to start sending out Windows SPAM or, as someone suggested, sending out their "gestapo-squads" to raid people's premises.
Without more facts there seems to be very little that can be commented on, beyond deploring both Microsoft for demanding it, and Lindows for giving it to them.
The logic was to provide a comprehensive set of functions, similar to those of the HotSync API on the PC, which would be accessible on the Palm via the RPC mechanism. You could also take advantage of the extensible nature of XML to, for example, extend the functionality. One prime example I had in mind was being able to pass a field structure to an open table request, and have the new HotSync mechanism automatically convert record data to/from textual format when reading/writing records.
I agree with you though that an XML-RPC wouldn't be the fastest system, but with some form of dynamic zip compression, you could reduce the transmission size dramatically.Especially for table access, the ability to zip up the stream, coupled with textual conversion of data, could provide significant compression of duplicated data across multiple records.
Paul.
This could be great news
on
Palm OS Spinoff
·
· Score: 2, Informative
One of the problems with dealing with the Palm OS is the brick wall you hit when you want to extend the OS. To get access to parts of the OS source code, you have to go through all sorts of rigmorole, signing NDAs, etc. Maybe now with the spinoff, they might Open Source it.
One project I was investigating recently was to see whether I could replace the default HotSync mechanism with a dynamically compressed XML-RPC connection so that systems could connect to the Palm across the Internet, and vice versa, thus obviating the whole PC HotSync requirement. I eventually lost enthusiasm for it, though, given the huge task of reimplementing the same mechanisms used by the HotSync subsystem, without the benefit of OS source.
Maybe if they Open Source it, I might reinvestigate doing it.:)
Now that's definitely food for thought. On most newer Palm's, the cradle has recharging facilities. This is implemted physically (in all the Palm's I've seen) by having the power cord directly connect to the serial or USB plug - the cable that then goes to the Palm cradle has both the signal and power lines within it.
It might thus be possible, on a defective socket, for the power lines to get shorted to the data lines, and cause damage to the main computer. I'm no expert on the serial/USB interfaces of computers, but it's entirely possible that even the low voltage coming out of the power-pack could do some damage.
If this was the case, then they'd certainly have a firm basis for suing Palm.
It's possible - I've heard stranger scenarios. One that crops to mind from the TechTales.com website is (paraphrased):
A technician, upon opening a box to work out modem problems a customer was having, found no modem card, but a phone cable spliced directly onto the main power cord. Upon asking the customer why on earth that was, the customer replied "Well, whoever made the computer forgot to install the the modem card, so knowing a bit about Electrical stuff I spliced in a cable myself.
It never fails to amaze me just how dumb some people are.;-).
The lawsuit is filed on behalf of *2* people, and they want class action status? ROTFL. Call me cynical, but this sounds too much like the people who try to get warranty replacements of their computers when their cats piddle on it.;-)
Their computers probably just broke down and they're hoping Palm will settle out of court and give them new ones just to get them to shut up.
And in the process come up with a bloody excellent series. Much better than TNG or TOS in many regards - at least it had a halfway decent continuing storyline thread.
I now pause the 1000 plus flames from TOS/TNG zealots.;-)
That's your opinion; but many other's vary. RPG, IMHO, *IS* the right name. You take on a role as a player in the game, exploring a virtual world.
Just because paper based RPG were a lot more creative (with a real DM continually controlling the game), doesn't make computer based RPG's not RPG's; the fact that you may have have like the paper based system more is immaterial.
If people know the exact mechanism the interception software uses, then they can figure out precisely how to get around it
This is already happening... companies are coming out with e-mail obfuscation software designed to protect against spy software like Carnavore, based on existing descriptions of how Carnavore works. They do stuff like stripping the headers, encrypting the text, etc.
So, it is certainly a valid concern on the part of the FBI that fully disclosing Carnavore would only aid in cicumvention software. But I agree that they've been, at the very least, a bit too selective in their choice of a review team. I seriously doubt they'll be able to avoid the impression that they've, as it was put, "stacked the deck".
A bit off-topic, but I noticed the "42" tattoo on the Linux Penguin in the presentation slides. Is this an existing part of the penguin's "look and feel", or is it a subtle indication on the part of Borland of their hopes for Kylix?;-)
PS: 42 being a reference to Douglas Adam's Ultimate Answer, for those who don't get it.
I'd say it's more a reflection of individual programming style. Personally, I prefer to start with the easy creation of a visual template for my application, and then proceed with the actual programming of it. Whilst the old methods did indeed force us to put our ideas on paper, the pain of then having to manually create the user interface and then cobble thte code onto it was more of a pain then the benefits that enforcement of paper designs provided.
I shudder to think back to some of the early Windows 3.1 developments tools... I was never able to finish any serious graphical application until Delphi 1.0 was released. And since then, I've never looked back.
As a long time Delphi developer, I'm practically drooling with anticipation. The only major problem I have is Borland's announcement that Kylix will have no support for Paradox tables. Which of course 99% of my existing Delphi applications are based on.;-(
About the only GOOD holodeck episodes are those involving Regs Barclay
There's more than that. The STNG episodes with Professor Moriarty were great. And the STV episode with the holographic creatures from another dimension was pretty amusing.;-)
I remember various copy-protected floppy schemes. People stopped buying copy protected programs because they failed
in various ways.
That brings back memories. One of my least favorite copy protections was that utilised by a PC game called "D/Generation". Not only did it have the usual weird sector arrangements, it also had code to read Ids on the computer hardware, and after only 2 changes of any hardware ID, the game would no longer install [it would save information on it's own diskette]. Talk about planned obselescence.;-(
Back on topic, the nice thing is that are so many storage options these days that an overall copy protection strategy would be extremely hard to enforce. We have hard drives, zip disks, CD-Rs, MOs, DVD-RAM, etc.
They could be. The serial number of a floppy is stored (if memory serves) in the boot sector (#1). So, not only could it be changed, but a simple diskette copy would also duplicate the original disk's serial number.
I'm not so sure about serial numbers on CD's, but I suspect the same to be true. After all, game companies have had to turn to defective copy protection schemes like Safedisc to protect games, which relies on trying to place ID information outside the area a standard CD can be read.
I don't honestly see how this scheme is going to be all that usefull. The only case I can see it being usefull is if the original content is distributed on the MO discs, which at pressing time had the media ID of the disc being pressed onto embedded somewhere in the application - so the installation could determine if it was being installed from that disc. However, I can't see how this could be implemented without great expense - if the content has to be modified for each pressed copy.
In the press release they go on about "protecting content distributed over the Internet". Quite frankly, unless they use a download mechanism that *requires* the user to have a Media ID equipped disc that the data will be saved directly on - and the site first gets the media ID of the disc and then streams down content with that media ID encoded), then having a Media ID on the disc is practically worthless.
Content providers are probably never, thankfully, going to rely on such a ridiculous system simply due to economics: the market base will be high enough with so many other available storage alternatives (eg. CD-R and upcoming rewritable DVDs).
Won't be long before Big Brother demands a slashdot account with the power to delete this post. Here's to hoping they get
a clue soon...
It won't be that unprecedented... I heard (I think it was here, actually) that Microsoft has been given a moderation account on e-bay so they delete the listings of anybody trying to sell their Microsoft products second hand.
It wouldn't surprise me, honestly, if the powers soon want to be able to start censoring Slashdot. It is, after all, one of the premiere sources of geek news, so it's one of the first places they'd aim to censor.
If all it requires is a hack then I don't see the reason why people wouldn't do it
A good comparison with all this debate is drawn by looking at the Playstation - they have hardware to prevent games from other regions being played. And what happens? In just about every computer swapmeet venue across the country you have Playstation conversion booths that'll hack your Playstation for you for AUS$30 or so.
Of course, I know in America they've got the DCMA to try and stop this sort of thing, but luckily the rest of the global community haven't followed the example of that ridiculous law.
As is often noted, "one who intentionally shoots a bullet into a state is as subject to the judicial jurisdiction of [that] state... as if he had actually fired the bullet in the state."
What's so stupid about them providing examples like this is that it ignores one of the most basic principles of the Internet - that it is an individual user that "pulls" information to himself. The publisher of information doesn't distribute to *anywhere* in the world except the server on which he or she places it.
Just out of curiousity, why is it that you don't use a mouse? Is it a esthetic reason, or it simply along the lines of your previous mouse being broken and you haven't got around to replacing it?
I thought that the protectability of computer source code was established with the PGP case.
Thankfully, it means that even if the judge rules in favor of the RIAA, on appeal the good guy's position will be significantly strengthened by the fact that the prior ruling was that code was protected by first amendant. And would thus supercede and invalidate any provision of the DMCA.
Slashdot Mirror
I posted another message on my take on the issue, but I don't think I put my perspective clearly enough. Given that it's a single website that the redirection is going through (at least, we can presume it is), it would be piss easy for a big outfit like E-Bay to detect the website name and not include it in any referral monetary program.
So the website is likely to be only usefull as intended - as a means of secretly counting how many Morpheus users visit a particular big site, without going to the trouble of having to enter into an agreement with the popular website owners to get the information. It's sneaky, it sucks, but I don't think that they're really trying to secretly make a few bucks.
From what I gather, it's always a single hardcoded site that the user is redirected to. So I think the original poster is off the mark in thinking that this is a way for the website to make some quick bucks in referrals. However, the issue of secretly redirecting a users browser is still a fairly serious issue to consider, just on privacy grounds. If I type in a URL, I expect it to go that URL, and not to secretly start visiting other websites that I didn't want.
Anyone remember a while ago AOL was detecting URLs for the popular search engines and instead forcing the user to their own search engine page? Is that still going on? That was bad, but at least they were open about it. This case is much worse in that it attempts to conceal what's it's doing
http://www.dailytexanonline.com/vnews/display.v
After having read the notice, I find myself wondering whether this is really something to worry about. The notice itself is very vague.. only stating that they were forced to give the list to Microsoft, and that Microsoft has promised not to abuse it.
With so few facts, it seems kind of hard to determine whether this is serious or not. Whilst Microsoft are notorious for underhanded tactics, I seriously doubt that they'd use the list of emails to start sending out Windows SPAM or, as someone suggested, sending out their "gestapo-squads" to raid people's premises.
Without more facts there seems to be very little that can be commented on, beyond deploring both Microsoft for demanding it, and Lindows for giving it to them.
The logic was to provide a comprehensive set of functions, similar to those of the HotSync API on the PC, which would be accessible on the Palm via the RPC mechanism. You could also take advantage of the extensible nature of XML to, for example, extend the functionality. One prime example I had in mind was being able to pass a field structure to an open table request, and have the new HotSync mechanism automatically convert record data to/from textual format when reading/writing records.
I agree with you though that an XML-RPC wouldn't be the fastest system, but with some form of dynamic zip compression, you could reduce the transmission size dramatically.Especially for table access, the ability to zip up the stream, coupled with textual conversion of data, could provide significant compression of duplicated data across multiple records.
Paul.
One of the problems with dealing with the Palm OS is the brick wall you hit when you want to extend the OS. To get access to parts of the OS source code, you have to go through all sorts of rigmorole, signing NDAs, etc. Maybe now with the spinoff, they might Open Source it.
:)
One project I was investigating recently was to see whether I could replace the default HotSync mechanism with a dynamically compressed XML-RPC connection so that systems could connect to the Palm across the Internet, and vice versa, thus obviating the whole PC HotSync requirement. I eventually lost enthusiasm for it, though, given the huge task of reimplementing the same mechanisms used by the HotSync subsystem, without the benefit of OS source.
Maybe if they Open Source it, I might reinvestigate doing it.
It might thus be possible, on a defective socket, for the power lines to get shorted to the data lines, and cause damage to the main computer. I'm no expert on the serial/USB interfaces of computers, but it's entirely possible that even the low voltage coming out of the power-pack could do some damage.
If this was the case, then they'd certainly have a firm basis for suing Palm.
A technician, upon opening a box to work out modem problems a customer was having, found no modem card, but a phone cable spliced directly onto the main power cord. Upon asking the customer why on earth that was, the customer replied "Well, whoever made the computer forgot to install the the modem card, so knowing a bit about Electrical stuff I spliced in a cable myself.
It never fails to amaze me just how dumb some people are. ;-).
Their computers probably just broke down and they're hoping Palm will settle out of court and give them new ones just to get them to shut up.
And in the process come up with a bloody excellent series. Much better than TNG or TOS in many regards - at least it had a halfway decent continuing storyline thread. I now pause the 1000 plus flames from TOS/TNG zealots. ;-)
That's your opinion; but many other's vary. RPG, IMHO, *IS* the right name. You take on a role as a player in the game, exploring a virtual world. Just because paper based RPG were a lot more creative (with a real DM continually controlling the game), doesn't make computer based RPG's not RPG's; the fact that you may have have like the paper based system more is immaterial.
If people know the exact mechanism the interception software uses, then they can figure out precisely how to get around it
This is already happening... companies are coming out with e-mail obfuscation software designed to protect against spy software like Carnavore, based on existing descriptions of how Carnavore works. They do stuff like stripping the headers, encrypting the text, etc.
So, it is certainly a valid concern on the part of the FBI that fully disclosing Carnavore would only aid in cicumvention software. But I agree that they've been, at the very least, a bit too selective in their choice of a review team. I seriously doubt they'll be able to avoid the impression that they've, as it was put, "stacked the deck".
Of course, these are three of the worst misfeatures of the C++ language.
You forgot operator overloading. ;-)
PS: 42 being a reference to Douglas Adam's Ultimate Answer, for those who don't get it.
I shudder to think back to some of the early Windows 3.1 developments tools... I was never able to finish any serious graphical application until Delphi 1.0 was released. And since then, I've never looked back.
As a long time Delphi developer, I'm practically drooling with anticipation. The only major problem I have is Borland's announcement that Kylix will have no support for Paradox tables. Which of course 99% of my existing Delphi applications are based on. ;-(
About the only GOOD holodeck episodes are those involving Regs Barclay
There's more than that. The STNG episodes with Professor Moriarty were great. And the STV episode with the holographic creatures from another dimension was pretty amusing. ;-)
I remember various copy-protected floppy schemes. People stopped buying copy protected programs because they failed in various ways.
That brings back memories. One of my least favorite copy protections was that utilised by a PC game called "D/Generation". Not only did it have the usual weird sector arrangements, it also had code to read Ids on the computer hardware, and after only 2 changes of any hardware ID, the game would no longer install [it would save information on it's own diskette]. Talk about planned obselescence. ;-(
Back on topic, the nice thing is that are so many storage options these days that an overall copy protection strategy would be extremely hard to enforce. We have hard drives, zip disks, CD-Rs, MOs, DVD-RAM, etc.
But I dont know if they can be changed.
They could be. The serial number of a floppy is stored (if memory serves) in the boot sector (#1). So, not only could it be changed, but a simple diskette copy would also duplicate the original disk's serial number.
I'm not so sure about serial numbers on CD's, but I suspect the same to be true. After all, game companies have had to turn to defective copy protection schemes like Safedisc to protect games, which relies on trying to place ID information outside the area a standard CD can be read.
I don't honestly see how this scheme is going to be all that usefull. The only case I can see it being usefull is if the original content is distributed on the MO discs, which at pressing time had the media ID of the disc being pressed onto embedded somewhere in the application - so the installation could determine if it was being installed from that disc. However, I can't see how this could be implemented without great expense - if the content has to be modified for each pressed copy.
In the press release they go on about "protecting content distributed over the Internet". Quite frankly, unless they use a download mechanism that *requires* the user to have a Media ID equipped disc that the data will be saved directly on - and the site first gets the media ID of the disc and then streams down content with that media ID encoded), then having a Media ID on the disc is practically worthless.
Content providers are probably never, thankfully, going to rely on such a ridiculous system simply due to economics: the market base will be high enough with so many other available storage alternatives (eg. CD-R and upcoming rewritable DVDs).
Won't be long before Big Brother demands a slashdot account with the power to delete this post. Here's to hoping they get a clue soon...
It won't be that unprecedented... I heard (I think it was here, actually) that Microsoft has been given a moderation account on e-bay so they delete the listings of anybody trying to sell their Microsoft products second hand.
It wouldn't surprise me, honestly, if the powers soon want to be able to start censoring Slashdot. It is, after all, one of the premiere sources of geek news, so it's one of the first places they'd aim to censor.
If all it requires is a hack then I don't see the reason why people wouldn't do it
A good comparison with all this debate is drawn by looking at the Playstation - they have hardware to prevent games from other regions being played. And what happens? In just about every computer swapmeet venue across the country you have Playstation conversion booths that'll hack your Playstation for you for AUS$30 or so.
Of course, I know in America they've got the DCMA to try and stop this sort of thing, but luckily the rest of the global community haven't followed the example of that ridiculous law.
As is often noted, "one who intentionally shoots a bullet into a state is as subject to the judicial jurisdiction of [that] state ... as if he had actually fired the bullet in the state."
What's so stupid about them providing examples like this is that it ignores one of the most basic principles of the Internet - that it is an individual user that "pulls" information to himself. The publisher of information doesn't distribute to *anywhere* in the world except the server on which he or she places it.
Not all of us are mousers
Just out of curiousity, why is it that you don't use a mouse? Is it a esthetic reason, or it simply along the lines of your previous mouse being broken and you haven't got around to replacing it?
I thought that the protectability of computer source code was established with the PGP case.
Thankfully, it means that even if the judge rules in favor of the RIAA, on appeal the good guy's position will be significantly strengthened by the fact that the prior ruling was that code was protected by first amendant. And would thus supercede and invalidate any provision of the DMCA.