If it isn't compliant, it probably doesn't have the rights to use Sony's logo.
What if Sony is the label releasing this screwy CD? Can't they do whatever they want with their trademark? I mean, that might be another angle -- saying Sony is committing fraud by saying it complies with the standard, but if Sony created the standard, then who'd challenge it?
While I never liked the idea of mp3.com and thought he was just mooching off a lucky domain, I thought their my.mp3.com service was pretty cool. I bought a CD on cheap-cds.com and I was able to listen to streams of it on mp3.com as soon as I placed my order. Very cool.
Anyway, what I wanted to address was your comments about Robertson being a sellout. As I said, I never liked him either, but as the CEO of a public company, he is legally required to do what will get shareholders the most money. I am completely sure that mp3.com's shareholders were thrilled to learn that their worthless chares of MPPP would be traded for shares of V. So he pretty much had to do it.
Not to mention that a ringing phone at 3 am is a bit unnerving, whereas the sweet "bloop" of an incoming AIM message is often refreshing. I, too, use IM services mostly for work. This may have something to do with the fact that I work for an IM company...
I HAVE TO deal with these idiots for my domain names
I registered one of my domains with NSI and transferred it to another reg as soon as possible. I recently registered another domain with Verio, who is using Melbourne IT as its registrar. Also check www.domainnamebuyersguide.com. You DON'T have to deal with the idiots anymore.
A year ago, the Cube was being hyped like crazy. What happened?
Well, it was a system that didn't offer better-enough performance from an iMac for the price. I think the lowend G4 towers were about the same price as the Cube. So all the cube had going for it was "style". And when style is the only thing a product has, it better make damn sure that there's no flaws in its style. Such as molding lines/cracks/whateve you want to call them. Also it wasn't exactly expandable so it wasn't really a power user's machine (hold the jokes please). So lame product + lame price == dismal sales. What an earth-shattering concept!
If the server and bandwidth was owned/provided by the University it sounds like they'll win in any court. Regardless of who owned the Intellectual Property, they own the physical property. But IANAL.
Since I can't get to the site I'm going to have to assume that what it is is a bunch of pages that give away all the locations of the things people hide/find on geocaching.com. It really sounds to me like this guy's whole site is dedicated to ruining the fun of geocaching. While I don't think you can (or should be able to) copyright or patent a GPS coordinate, this guy's site is a pretty crummy thing to do. Why ruin it for everybody? And what other recourse would Geocaching have than to sue him? I have to side with Geo in this case.
Like I said, I am working on the assumption that this site is dedicated to giving away the "answers" to the challenges on geocaching.com since I can't get to the site. If this is not correct, please explain.
Maybe we're going to have to wait twenty years for the current crop of teens and twenty-somethings to become eligible for office in order to get some sense into the government. Maybe one day there'll be a quake addict in office. That would be nice. Somebody who can stand up and say "I played shooters as a kid and have never killed anyone."
Also, how come in every Jon Katz article, years such as 1999 show up as l999 (that is, L999)? Is this due to bad OCR software or something?
Still, as the owner of a PPC G3 and a K6-2, both running at 400 Mhz, I can tell you that the gcc performance I get is much greater on the ppc side. It's roughly comparable to the speed I observed on an Athlon 1G system. Only now that I have Linux on both can I see what the G3 marketing hoopla was really all about, since now both systems run the same sw; the ppc 750 (or G3) really does have much better performance than equivalent-speed i386 systems
With all due respect, you're comparing one of Apple's top processors with one of the worst x86 processors ever. For Less than $60 you can get a 800 MHz Duron, try it with that. And anecdotal evidence about compiling being "roughly comparable" on PPC 400 and x86 1000 doesn't hold much water with me. Compiling what? How long did it actually take? Most systems built around k6-2 processors that I've seen use inferior motherboards and memory, which I'm sure play a role in your observation.
Well, no, I can't, but how much can a 1394 card cost? Another $100? And honestly, I have never met anybody who would ever, ever do that. Can you get 140 frames/second in Quake 3 at 1024x768 resolution on your G3? That's something I use daily, and something I care about much more than a "feature" like making home movies.
And I'll be glad to stop the "non-sense comparison" as soon as Apple drops its nonsense benchmarks in which they claim that a 500 MHz G3 is faster than a 1000 MHz x86.
I develop software on a Mac. It is a painful experience. As far as I am concerned, the MacOS is a steaming pile of feces. Nothing you can list as an "advantage" of the Mac is an advantage to me, so don't even bother listing any more.
Why is the blame in this article being placed almost exclusively on AOL? With AOL and Gateway having invested such huge sums of money in Transmeta, perhaps they were able to secure a different license than GPL. Just because Transmeta released Midori Linux under GPL doesn't mean that that is the license under which AOL received it. This article is pretty screwy.
Q. Still, wouldn't it have been better for opponents of SDMI if you let SDMI go ahead and deploy a flawed technology, so music lovers could teach them a lesson by copying music despite the technology?
Of course not. This is scientific research: it is not our goal to engage in tactics such as tricking the industry into choosing a flawed system. Our goal is simply to analyze security systems and share our results openly with the scientific community.
My main point was that it was foolish of the researchers to think that SDMI/RIAA would allow them to publish the results of their research, especially if their research showed any weaknesses in any of the proposed systems.
And despite what the FAQ may say, I still think it was wrong of them to participate in a "contest" whose goal is to develop technology designed to take away people's rights. I understand that analyzing encryption is standard practice but if some terrorist organization posted a contest to crack encryption they use for sending messages about their next bomb targets, would the researchers still participate? Weed out all the bad encryption technologies until they find one that was "uncrackable" and pass this info along to the terrorists? All in the name of research? Is this still a valid excuse?
I find it hard to believe that these researchers really thought that RIAA would allow them to present this paper. RIAA does not care about academia or scientific research past the point that they generate money for RIAA's member corporations. If anybody needed any more evidence that people should not participate in these "hacking" contests that only serve RIAA/MPAA, here it is.
I really don't feel too bad for these researchers in this case because by participating in the SDMI challenge they were helping the RIAA create a technology to be used to take away the rights of music listeners. While they may have done it for academic reasons, I think it was a really foolish thing to do. The only reason I can see for them to even participate would be to see just how lame the RIAA's encryption schemes could be, at which point they should have pointed and laughed, then walked away without even bothering to crack the code. Next time wait til sony deploys it in 1,000,000 SDMI compliant mp3 players before cracking it.
As with any other question of this type, if you don't want to fall victim to a service like this, don't use it! If you allow yourself to become dependent on something like TiVo (or ReplayTV), which I'm sure told you in advance that they'd "upgrade" the software whenever they choose, then you really can't complain when they excercise that option.
It's sort of a different case if they change the service so that it's completely different from what it was when you bought it. But like I said, they reserved that right in the EULA, so even though it really sucks balls, you accepted that risk.
This is one reason I think software as a subscription is a horrible idea. If the next incarnation of MS Word (Word.NET I assume) decides that I don't really need a spell checker, I'm SOL. But like the title says, speak with your wallet. If/when I get a computer that comes with any subscription-based software the first thing I'll do is format, install my warezed win2k and warezed o2k (hypothetically speaking of course). The only thing companies care about is money. If they find a feature in an app is causing them to lose money, they'll remove it. If adding a super-annoying "feature" (e.g. ads) will get them more money, they'll add it in a second. Why anybody would expect them to do anything else is beyond me.
Here are some of my recent speed test results from DSL Reports:
Time (US east) Test Results..
2001-03-28 18:43:01 Speed test 3055/827 kbps
2001-03-28 18:42:03 Speed test 2073/606 kbps
2001-03-27 22:40:07 Line quality 10% loss latency 41.7ms View..
2001-03-27 12:38:03 Line quality 5% loss latency 46.0ms View..
2001-03-26 23:47:07 Line quality 10% loss latency 41.5ms View..
2001-03-26 21:57:51 Speed test 3051/902 kbps
2001-03-26 22:37:02 Line quality 30% loss latency 44.2ms View..
2001-03-24 13:47:11 Speed test 2978/803 kbps
2001-03-24 01:32:47 Speed test 2986/887 kbps
2001-03-23 11:46:26 Line quality 10% loss latency 45.7ms View..
2001-03-23 04:01:49 Speed test 3076/934 kbps
2001-03-22 23:52:44 Speed test 3010/821 kbps
2001-03-22 12:08:32 Line quality 10% loss latency 47.4ms View..
2001-03-22 11:44:28 Speed test 2232/790 kbps
2001-03-20 01:36:47 Line quality 0% loss latency 43.9ms View..
2001-03-20 00:27:16 Speed test 3051/713 kbps
2001-03-19 21:17:58 Speed test 956/859 kbps
2001-03-19 11:04:52 Speed test 2104/808 kbps
2001-03-19 02:40:02 Speed test 2942/859 kbps
I have decent download speeds but terrible PL and latency. These are from last night:
Ping statistics for 209.73.44.138:
Packets: Sent = 9554, Received = 8003, Lost = 1551 (16% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 134ms, Maximum = 299ms, Average = 136ms
-----
Tracing route to quake3server.doublespace.com [209.73.44.138]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 10 ms 9 ms 21 ms secret!
2 31 ms 8 ms 9 ms router-32-57.nycap.rr.com [24.29.32.57]
3 15 ms 9 ms 37 ms router-33-23.nycap.rr.com [24.29.33.23]
4 16 ms 15 ms 17 ms router-33-18.nycap.rr.com [24.29.33.18]
5 10 ms 11 ms 11 ms 24.218.189.126
6 18 ms 18 ms 18 ms 24.218.190.157
7 19 ms 19 ms 20 ms bsgsr01-srp4.rr.com [24.218.189.169]
8 28 ms 31 ms 27 ms 24.218.190.246
9 32 ms 38 ms 35 ms 24.218.190.194
10 164 ms 186 ms 154 ms mae-east-atm-oc12.above.net [198.32.187.18]
11 165 ms 149 ms 149 ms core4-core1-oc48.iad1.above.net [208.185.0.138]
12 162 ms 169 ms 154 ms lga1-iad1-oc192-2.lga1.above.net [208.184.233.62]
13 150 ms 155 ms 162 ms main2-core1-oc48.lga1.above.net [216.200.127.193]
14 173 ms 186 ms 197 ms 208.184.36.229.dti.net [208.184.36.229]
15 160 ms 211 ms 154 ms quake3server.doublespace.com [209.73.44.138]
Trace complete.
-----
Ping statistics for 63.73.156.13:
Packets: Sent = 11072, Received = 9962, Lost = 1110 (10% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 32ms, Maximum = 1520ms, Average = 45ms
-----
Tracing route to 63.73.156.13 over a maximum of 30 hops
1 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms secret!
2 9 ms 8 ms 8 ms router-32-57.nycap.rr.com [24.29.32.57]
3 9 ms 9 ms 10 ms router-33-23.nycap.rr.com [24.29.33.23]
4 13 ms 9 ms 9 ms router-33-18.nycap.rr.com [24.29.33.18]
5 11 ms 9 ms 14 ms 24.218.189.126
6 26 ms 19 ms 31 ms 24.218.190.157
7 20 ms 23 ms 22 ms bsgsr01-srp4.rr.com [24.218.189.169]
8 36 ms 25 ms 61 ms 24.218.190.246
9 34 ms 34 ms 32 ms 24.218.190.194
10 37 ms 36 ms 35 ms 251.ATM1-0-0.BR2.TCO1.ALTER.NET [137.39.92.41]
11 47 ms 36 ms 37 ms 0.so-3-1-0.XL2.DCA6.ALTER.NET [152.63.38.122]
12 36 ms 41 ms 38 ms 0.so-7-0-0.XR2.DCA6.ALTER.NET [152.63.38.90]
13 42 ms 46 ms 37 ms 284.at-5-1-0.XR2.TCO1.ALTER.NET [152.63.33.66]
14 41 ms 64 ms 40 ms 192.ATM11-0-0.GW2.DCA3.ALTER.NET [146.188.163.181]
15 42 ms 43 ms 39 ms appnet-gw.customer.ALTER.NET [157.130.21.98]
16 44 ms 42 ms 41 ms 63.73.156.13
Trace complete.
And just to be on the safe side, here's one from just now:
Ping statistics for 209.73.44.138:
Packets: Sent = 208, Received = 174, Lost = 34 (16% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 145ms, Maximum = 204ms, Average = 129ms
I've been bitching to RR since December about this but they don't seem to care. Since I got RR to play Q3A, the 3 Mbit download speed doesn't really help me much. The massive PL and ping jumps on any backbone provider (similar results on servers routed through exodus) make this connection nearly useless for me. I can't get DSL in my area either. Oh well. Anyway you should keep in mind that there's more to a connection than download speeds. I'd give anything to have a 20 ping. I even considered paying $129/month for 192k SDSL. A friend who has (er, had) NP DSL in MD pings 7 EVERYWHERE. 3 Hops to exodus. I can only dream.
The ads on most content sites line the top, left, right, and bottom of the page. Slashdot has one ad banner. The only time I ever had a problem with the ads here was when they were annoying Java applets. If you guys want to institute a pay-for service in addition to the existing one, that's one thing. But please don't go the route of CNET and ZDNET with those big square things in teh middle of the page (or the huge ones that are 6 times as high as they are wide). Slashdot's ad system is great (from a user POV).
Slashdot Mirror
What if Sony is the label releasing this screwy CD? Can't they do whatever they want with their trademark? I mean, that might be another angle -- saying Sony is committing fraud by saying it complies with the standard, but if Sony created the standard, then who'd challenge it?
______________________________
Anyway, what I wanted to address was your comments about Robertson being a sellout. As I said, I never liked him either, but as the CEO of a public company, he is legally required to do what will get shareholders the most money. I am completely sure that mp3.com's shareholders were thrilled to learn that their worthless chares of MPPP would be traded for shares of V. So he pretty much had to do it.
______________________________
______________________________
I registered one of my domains with NSI and transferred it to another reg as soon as possible. I recently registered another domain with Verio, who is using Melbourne IT as its registrar. Also check www.domainnamebuyersguide.com. You DON'T have to deal with the idiots anymore.
______________________________
______________________________
______________________________
______________________________
______________________________
______________________________
__________________________________________________ ___
Like I said, I am working on the assumption that this site is dedicated to giving away the "answers" to the challenges on geocaching.com since I can't get to the site. If this is not correct, please explain.
__________________________________________________ ___
Also, how come in every Jon Katz article, years such as 1999 show up as l999 (that is, L999)? Is this due to bad OCR software or something?
__________________________________________________ ___
Tough guy, posting Anonymously.
__________________________________________________ ___
With all due respect, you're comparing one of Apple's top processors with one of the worst x86 processors ever. For Less than $60 you can get a 800 MHz Duron, try it with that. And anecdotal evidence about compiling being "roughly comparable" on PPC 400 and x86 1000 doesn't hold much water with me. Compiling what? How long did it actually take? Most systems built around k6-2 processors that I've seen use inferior motherboards and memory, which I'm sure play a role in your observation.
__________________________________________________ ___
And I'll be glad to stop the "non-sense comparison" as soon as Apple drops its nonsense benchmarks in which they claim that a 500 MHz G3 is faster than a 1000 MHz x86.
I develop software on a Mac. It is a painful experience. As far as I am concerned, the MacOS is a steaming pile of feces. Nothing you can list as an "advantage" of the Mac is an advantage to me, so don't even bother listing any more.
__________________________________________________ ___
now I put some more text because of the gay lameness filter.
__________________________________________________ ___
__________________________________________________ ___
__________________________________________________ ___
while(true) { karma--; }
__________________________________________________ ___
And despite what the FAQ may say, I still think it was wrong of them to participate in a "contest" whose goal is to develop technology designed to take away people's rights. I understand that analyzing encryption is standard practice but if some terrorist organization posted a contest to crack encryption they use for sending messages about their next bomb targets, would the researchers still participate? Weed out all the bad encryption technologies until they find one that was "uncrackable" and pass this info along to the terrorists? All in the name of research? Is this still a valid excuse?
__________________________________________________ ___
I really don't feel too bad for these researchers in this case because by participating in the SDMI challenge they were helping the RIAA create a technology to be used to take away the rights of music listeners. While they may have done it for academic reasons, I think it was a really foolish thing to do. The only reason I can see for them to even participate would be to see just how lame the RIAA's encryption schemes could be, at which point they should have pointed and laughed, then walked away without even bothering to crack the code. Next time wait til sony deploys it in 1,000,000 SDMI compliant mp3 players before cracking it.
__________________________________________________ ___
It's sort of a different case if they change the service so that it's completely different from what it was when you bought it. But like I said, they reserved that right in the EULA, so even though it really sucks balls, you accepted that risk.
This is one reason I think software as a subscription is a horrible idea. If the next incarnation of MS Word (Word.NET I assume) decides that I don't really need a spell checker, I'm SOL. But like the title says, speak with your wallet. If/when I get a computer that comes with any subscription-based software the first thing I'll do is format, install my warezed win2k and warezed o2k (hypothetically speaking of course). The only thing companies care about is money. If they find a feature in an app is causing them to lose money, they'll remove it. If adding a super-annoying "feature" (e.g. ads) will get them more money, they'll add it in a second. Why anybody would expect them to do anything else is beyond me.
__________________________________________________ ___
Whoa. It's almost like that was their goal all along! Heavy.
__________________________________________________ ___
Time (US east) Test Results..
2001-03-28 18:43:01 Speed test 3055/827 kbps
2001-03-28 18:42:03 Speed test 2073/606 kbps
2001-03-27 22:40:07 Line quality 10% loss latency 41.7ms View..
2001-03-27 12:38:03 Line quality 5% loss latency 46.0ms View..
2001-03-26 23:47:07 Line quality 10% loss latency 41.5ms View..
2001-03-26 21:57:51 Speed test 3051/902 kbps
2001-03-26 22:37:02 Line quality 30% loss latency 44.2ms View..
2001-03-24 13:47:11 Speed test 2978/803 kbps
2001-03-24 01:32:47 Speed test 2986/887 kbps
2001-03-23 11:46:26 Line quality 10% loss latency 45.7ms View..
2001-03-23 04:01:49 Speed test 3076/934 kbps
2001-03-22 23:52:44 Speed test 3010/821 kbps
2001-03-22 12:08:32 Line quality 10% loss latency 47.4ms View..
2001-03-22 11:44:28 Speed test 2232/790 kbps
2001-03-20 01:36:47 Line quality 0% loss latency 43.9ms View..
2001-03-20 00:27:16 Speed test 3051/713 kbps
2001-03-19 21:17:58 Speed test 956/859 kbps
2001-03-19 11:04:52 Speed test 2104/808 kbps
2001-03-19 02:40:02 Speed test 2942/859 kbps
I have decent download speeds but terrible PL and latency. These are from last night:
Ping statistics for 209.73.44.138:
Packets: Sent = 9554, Received = 8003, Lost = 1551 (16% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 134ms, Maximum = 299ms, Average = 136ms
-----
Tracing route to quake3server.doublespace.com [209.73.44.138]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 10 ms 9 ms 21 ms secret!
2 31 ms 8 ms 9 ms router-32-57.nycap.rr.com [24.29.32.57]
3 15 ms 9 ms 37 ms router-33-23.nycap.rr.com [24.29.33.23]
4 16 ms 15 ms 17 ms router-33-18.nycap.rr.com [24.29.33.18]
5 10 ms 11 ms 11 ms 24.218.189.126
6 18 ms 18 ms 18 ms 24.218.190.157
7 19 ms 19 ms 20 ms bsgsr01-srp4.rr.com [24.218.189.169]
8 28 ms 31 ms 27 ms 24.218.190.246
9 32 ms 38 ms 35 ms 24.218.190.194
10 164 ms 186 ms 154 ms mae-east-atm-oc12.above.net [198.32.187.18]
11 165 ms 149 ms 149 ms core4-core1-oc48.iad1.above.net [208.185.0.138]
12 162 ms 169 ms 154 ms lga1-iad1-oc192-2.lga1.above.net [208.184.233.62]
13 150 ms 155 ms 162 ms main2-core1-oc48.lga1.above.net [216.200.127.193]
14 173 ms 186 ms 197 ms 208.184.36.229.dti.net [208.184.36.229]
15 160 ms 211 ms 154 ms quake3server.doublespace.com [209.73.44.138]
Trace complete.
-----
Ping statistics for 63.73.156.13:
Packets: Sent = 11072, Received = 9962, Lost = 1110 (10% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 32ms, Maximum = 1520ms, Average = 45ms
-----
Tracing route to 63.73.156.13 over a maximum of 30 hops
1 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms secret!
2 9 ms 8 ms 8 ms router-32-57.nycap.rr.com [24.29.32.57]
3 9 ms 9 ms 10 ms router-33-23.nycap.rr.com [24.29.33.23]
4 13 ms 9 ms 9 ms router-33-18.nycap.rr.com [24.29.33.18]
5 11 ms 9 ms 14 ms 24.218.189.126
6 26 ms 19 ms 31 ms 24.218.190.157
7 20 ms 23 ms 22 ms bsgsr01-srp4.rr.com [24.218.189.169]
8 36 ms 25 ms 61 ms 24.218.190.246
9 34 ms 34 ms 32 ms 24.218.190.194
10 37 ms 36 ms 35 ms 251.ATM1-0-0.BR2.TCO1.ALTER.NET [137.39.92.41]
11 47 ms 36 ms 37 ms 0.so-3-1-0.XL2.DCA6.ALTER.NET [152.63.38.122]
12 36 ms 41 ms 38 ms 0.so-7-0-0.XR2.DCA6.ALTER.NET [152.63.38.90]
13 42 ms 46 ms 37 ms 284.at-5-1-0.XR2.TCO1.ALTER.NET [152.63.33.66]
14 41 ms 64 ms 40 ms 192.ATM11-0-0.GW2.DCA3.ALTER.NET [146.188.163.181]
15 42 ms 43 ms 39 ms appnet-gw.customer.ALTER.NET [157.130.21.98]
16 44 ms 42 ms 41 ms 63.73.156.13
Trace complete.
And just to be on the safe side, here's one from just now:
Ping statistics for 209.73.44.138:
Packets: Sent = 208, Received = 174, Lost = 34 (16% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 145ms, Maximum = 204ms, Average = 129ms
Some more stuff of mine: DSLR Line Quality test, my RR review.
I've been bitching to RR since December about this but they don't seem to care. Since I got RR to play Q3A, the 3 Mbit download speed doesn't really help me much. The massive PL and ping jumps on any backbone provider (similar results on servers routed through exodus) make this connection nearly useless for me. I can't get DSL in my area either. Oh well. Anyway you should keep in mind that there's more to a connection than download speeds. I'd give anything to have a 20 ping. I even considered paying $129/month for 192k SDSL. A friend who has (er, had) NP DSL in MD pings 7 EVERYWHERE. 3 Hops to exodus. I can only dream.
__________________________________________________ ___
__________________________________________________ ___