The exhibit specifically states that spacing was adjusted to enhance similarity; I would hope they'd mention if they reordered it as well, otherwise they're going to get roasted for that.
But the local variables all having the same names seems quite suspicious to me.
depends how they're defining content. Source? Bytecode? Functions named a, b, and c? Any of these could be an answer to "what's in this library?" The first being identical obviously means non-clean; the second very likely does, but the third, not so much.
I kind of want to because when they're stored compactly (in boxes in the cabinet under the TV) I forget what I have. For the time being I've got the fileserver that the PS3 plays AVIs from set up with a pile of directories named after the DVDs I own, so I can go through the list, but having the actual video data online would let me move those boxes into a closet or the attic:)
Well, let's see. The Earth masses about 6.4e23kg, or roughly 2^89 grams. Assume half the IPv6 range gets 'wasted' on multicast, lost addresses, multiple assigments, whathaveyou, so there's enough addresses for 2^127 entities. That means 2^38 addresses per gram of matter on/in Earth. Basically, every gram of matter on Earth gets 64 entire IPv4 address spaces. (I'm sure it's really more complicated than that, but the point is there's a _lot_ of addresses.)
I can't think of any way to use up that many addresses in a short enough timeframe for the prediction to be meaningful; how mankind uses the internet will have changed drastically (several times) before that gets used up.
Nope, the probability that you chose right originally is still only 1/100.
Look at it this way. You pick a door. Now there's 2 sets of doors. Set A has 1 door, set B has 99. There's a 1/100 chance that set A has a car in it, and a 99% chance set B has a car in it.
Now the host reveals 98 doors from set B. Set A still has 1 door, set B still has 99 doors, but you know that 98 of them have a goat. Big deal; you knew that at least 98 of the doors in set B had a goat already. The probability of a car being in set A vs set B hasn't changed, because none of the information you had about what's in which set has changed. The only thing that has changed is that the last unrevealed door in set B has gone from having a 1/99 chance of having the car (if it's in set B) to a 1/1 chance.
Nope. Those fractions aren't 1/8 + 1/80 + 1/800; you're not doing base 10 so you don't multiply by 1/10. You multiply by 1/8. 0.1111... (base 8) is 1/8 + 1/64 + 1/512 + 1/4096... Using the proper denominators, 0.111... (base 8) comes out to approximately 0.1428571427+ (I only went for the first 10 terms of the series), not 0.1401388888. I leave the calculation of 1/7 to you.
Until someone decides he needs a murder spree for political reasons and thaws one out. Then they have to unfreeze Sylvester Stallone, team him up with Sandra Bullock, and feed him lots of taco bell...
So you have a NAT system that can block outgoing ssh connections based on the username as well as the address, or block individual pages of a website? Awesome! Tell me more. I've been using application proxies for this stuff.
Hmmm. You have a point. Therefore I expect the DOJ to get an executive order freezing the implementation of IPv6 until they figure out how to break IPSEC, backed by the RIAA/MPAA who want to go with the ISP-level NAT solution to help kill P2P.
bittorrent. Okay, it works behind nat that you control and can open incoming ports on, but you just handed your nat over to your ISP, so no inbound port for you. Everything you download is going to have to be on http, and the server holding the linux image you want is going to be _slammed_...
I like this, but it leaves the car rolling with no driver. Can we rig it to launch the car into the air and off the roadway but leave the driver in place?
Or, just turn on the hazard lights (to warn bystanders) and an air raid siren in the headrest?
If Apple were to release some new gadget and call it "iDroid", you can bet Google would be all over their ass, and with good reason. Borrowing another's trademark with the intent to leverage another's success is a perfect example of trademark infringement.
Actually, Lucasfilm would be all over them. Google licenses the term 'droid' from them (and puts blurbs in their TV ads saying so).
I personally just think it's a blessing that the patent system hasn't started extending the duration, like copyright has. I fully expect that nothing new will ever enter public domain again, because Disney will never again let the copyright on Steamboat Willie approach expiration.
Actually, I don't think the author is besmirching OSS devs. The quote about OSS vs. Fairies is lacking a bit of context from TFA; he's talking about getting all the bugs fixed in a certain timeframe (a month). Given more time, I think the OSS devs would have a much better shot than the fairies.
Actually, just adding "immune to key revocation" to any random piece of HDMI hardware would seem to be a very worthwhile use of this, so when the Evil Chinese Bootleggers use the key built into your TV to do their Nefarious Deeds and the key gets revoked, your TV just builds a new key. (Or perhaps since the master key is out, someone will realize that there's no point to revoking keys anymore:)
You're right, I hadn't considered PPV. I think this patent would cover a PPV choose-your-own-ending, and realistically that'd be easier to implement. I suspect, though, that the PPV CYOE offerings that were not previously issued as theater CYOE offerings will be very few.
No worries. Nothing that is not already public domain will ever get there unless the copyright holder explicitly puts it there. Disney will take care of that for you. (Steamboat Willie actually did go public domain at one point as I recall, briefly, before they bought another extension to the copyright term. I expect they'll keep a closer eye on that in future.)
Correct, there is no legal right to fair use. There is only a set of actions which, while infringing of copyright, you can't get sued for.
An actual affirmed right of fair use would blow the DMCA out of the water, because DRM would be a violation of that right.
But the claims do include specifics like 'with some weighting factor based at least on ticket price', so nothing for home use is going to be a match. This is very specifically aimed at theaters.
Slashdot Mirror
The exhibit specifically states that spacing was adjusted to enhance similarity; I would hope they'd mention if they reordered it as well, otherwise they're going to get roasted for that. But the local variables all having the same names seems quite suspicious to me.
depends how they're defining content. Source? Bytecode? Functions named a, b, and c? Any of these could be an answer to "what's in this library?" The first being identical obviously means non-clean; the second very likely does, but the third, not so much.
I tend to think of it as "the love of power" instead. Seems to cover most everything.
I kind of want to because when they're stored compactly (in boxes in the cabinet under the TV) I forget what I have. For the time being I've got the fileserver that the PS3 plays AVIs from set up with a pile of directories named after the DVDs I own, so I can go through the list, but having the actual video data online would let me move those boxes into a closet or the attic :)
I can't think of any way to use up that many addresses in a short enough timeframe for the prediction to be meaningful; how mankind uses the internet will have changed drastically (several times) before that gets used up.
If we can move it that much we should move it into a convenient safe orbit and mine the sucker.
Look at it this way. You pick a door. Now there's 2 sets of doors. Set A has 1 door, set B has 99. There's a 1/100 chance that set A has a car in it, and a 99% chance set B has a car in it.
Now the host reveals 98 doors from set B. Set A still has 1 door, set B still has 99 doors, but you know that 98 of them have a goat. Big deal; you knew that at least 98 of the doors in set B had a goat already. The probability of a car being in set A vs set B hasn't changed, because none of the information you had about what's in which set has changed. The only thing that has changed is that the last unrevealed door in set B has gone from having a 1/99 chance of having the car (if it's in set B) to a 1/1 chance.
Nope. Those fractions aren't 1/8 + 1/80 + 1/800; you're not doing base 10 so you don't multiply by 1/10. You multiply by 1/8. 0.1111... (base 8) is 1/8 + 1/64 + 1/512 + 1/4096... Using the proper denominators, 0.111... (base 8) comes out to approximately 0.1428571427+ (I only went for the first 10 terms of the series), not 0.1401388888. I leave the calculation of 1/7 to you.
This sounds interesting. Do you happen to have plans online anywhere?
Until someone decides he needs a murder spree for political reasons and thaws one out. Then they have to unfreeze Sylvester Stallone, team him up with Sandra Bullock, and feed him lots of taco bell...
Most of the 'specification' consists of adding 'in the following environment:' and then a lot of information about the neighborhood.
So you have a NAT system that can block outgoing ssh connections based on the username as well as the address, or block individual pages of a website? Awesome! Tell me more. I've been using application proxies for this stuff.
Hmmm. You have a point. Therefore I expect the DOJ to get an executive order freezing the implementation of IPv6 until they figure out how to break IPSEC, backed by the RIAA/MPAA who want to go with the ISP-level NAT solution to help kill P2P.
bittorrent. Okay, it works behind nat that you control and can open incoming ports on, but you just handed your nat over to your ISP, so no inbound port for you. Everything you download is going to have to be on http, and the server holding the linux image you want is going to be _slammed_...
I like this, but it leaves the car rolling with no driver. Can we rig it to launch the car into the air and off the roadway but leave the driver in place? Or, just turn on the hazard lights (to warn bystanders) and an air raid siren in the headrest?
If Apple were to release some new gadget and call it "iDroid", you can bet Google would be all over their ass, and with good reason. Borrowing another's trademark with the intent to leverage another's success is a perfect example of trademark infringement.
Actually, Lucasfilm would be all over them. Google licenses the term 'droid' from them (and puts blurbs in their TV ads saying so).
I personally just think it's a blessing that the patent system hasn't started extending the duration, like copyright has. I fully expect that nothing new will ever enter public domain again, because Disney will never again let the copyright on Steamboat Willie approach expiration.
Actually, I don't think the author is besmirching OSS devs. The quote about OSS vs. Fairies is lacking a bit of context from TFA; he's talking about getting all the bugs fixed in a certain timeframe (a month). Given more time, I think the OSS devs would have a much better shot than the fairies.
I'd buy one. Heck, if CRTs were still the big thing, I bet lots of places would buy them to avoid burnin on their 24/7 display of .
Actually, just adding "immune to key revocation" to any random piece of HDMI hardware would seem to be a very worthwhile use of this, so when the Evil Chinese Bootleggers use the key built into your TV to do their Nefarious Deeds and the key gets revoked, your TV just builds a new key. (Or perhaps since the master key is out, someone will realize that there's no point to revoking keys anymore :)
You're right, I hadn't considered PPV. I think this patent would cover a PPV choose-your-own-ending, and realistically that'd be easier to implement. I suspect, though, that the PPV CYOE offerings that were not previously issued as theater CYOE offerings will be very few.
No worries. Nothing that is not already public domain will ever get there unless the copyright holder explicitly puts it there. Disney will take care of that for you. (Steamboat Willie actually did go public domain at one point as I recall, briefly, before they bought another extension to the copyright term. I expect they'll keep a closer eye on that in future.)
Correct, there is no legal right to fair use. There is only a set of actions which, while infringing of copyright, you can't get sued for. An actual affirmed right of fair use would blow the DMCA out of the water, because DRM would be a violation of that right.
Sweet, thanks for the pointer. I was also concerned about the death of OpenSolaris but it sounds like Nexenta may be just what I want.
But the claims do include specifics like 'with some weighting factor based at least on ticket price', so nothing for home use is going to be a match. This is very specifically aimed at theaters.