I would think an exact 'bit' copy would get around the copy issue (though maby not the playback issues...)
This is giving me flashbacks to the mid '80's when software manufacturers would do almost anything to prevent copying. Onc poplular technique was to create 'errors' on a floppy by physically damaging the disk in specific areas. Then a program would run an search for those errors. Didn't take too long for somebody to create a TSR to track and feed the errors to the program.
I'm hoping that in some ways this will blow over as the Music industry realizes the cost of trying to keep up with those willing to break the protection schemes. Sure one can sue the 'hacker' but then one still has to invest in R&D to come up with another system to protect the property. In time this will get expensive and we'll see simpler systems (e.g. simialr to cd keys or something...) in place.
kinda wrong... In the case of fibre you only have a limited number of wavelengths to work with. From the point of view of the cable (wave propogation, how often the signal needs to be boosted ect.) Light is a wave, not a particle. So you have to be able to bouce the wave without loosing data.
IEEE Spectrum had a good article on this a few months ago. It might be available for free on thier site (www.ieee.org) but I'm not sure.
Mold/fungs that had been brought up had mutated (due to radiation) and was rather, mmm, tenacious. One astronout said that he didn't want to put his hand into certain areas (i.e. access panels to wiring and such) because it 'was so gross'. I think Wired had an article on this a while ago (thought the memory is fading.)
I honestly don't expect that anything on board was dangerous. Also I do expect that the heat of re-entry killed anything on boared. But its not as simple as, it came from earth so we can deal with it. Hell influenza comes from earth but mutates each year requiring new vaccines. HIV comes from earth but we don't know how to deal with it. As for more complex organisms (like mold) who knows what it can mutate into (from a surviveablity point of view)
As mentioned in another post, the two industries are very different. Besides the royalty stuctures being different, what is killing book publishers and authors right now is the tax code.
Any books in stock are considered taxable, so it is now in a publishers best interest to keep stock low. What this means is that 'mid-list' authors (like Spider Robinson, Walter Jon Williams, and others) have thier books go out of print a lot faster. Providing less time for people to notice that the book is out and therefore reducing sales.
So... if demand can be shown, the book might get republished, but most authors are not makeing a lot of money. Hence Harlan's rant; which, for those of us who are actually fans of Mr. Ellison, are not surprised by this. He has held strong opions on artists rights long before the internet came along.
-pc
"The problem is that things are getting more and more complicated - very soon, things like SMTP will be obsolete, and only groupware like Exchange will be viable - simply because it's more productive for a company to have groupware."
Exchange is not groupware O.K. I'm biased, as and ex Lotus Domino/Notes programmer. But Exchange does not, in itself, contain enough to be groupware (add on VB and MS.Net, then it gets somewhere.)But this is similar too the O'Reilly book on groupware. In said book the author shows how to use various open source applications towards of the goal of creating groupware.
"There isn't the money in open source to be able to afford to produce things like this - because there's no revenue in giving things away, companies can't afford the programmers to produce the complicated products of the future."
IBM, amonst others would disagree with you. MS's revolution was showing that one can make a lot of money off selling software, regardless of platform. I think Linux will show one can make a decent living off services supporting software. For example, IBM will happily set up Linux and an Apache web server for you. Integrate that with a legacy database, and show you how to develop applications (preferably with Webshpere of course.) Now the OS and web server software are free, but how much money is IBM going to make helping you to set all that up, quite a nice profit. It these sorts of services where companies that support open source software will succeed. Companies, of various sizes, will always need and be willing to pay for experts that can walk in and help them out.
"Even Netscape, bankrolled by one of the world's largest companies, AOL, can't keep up, via open source, with expensive protocols like XSL and so on."
Errr... irrelevent, I would contend that AOL doesn't really care that much about Netscape, execpt to own the technology (hedge against MS) and to own the programmers that go with that tech (another hedge.)
This will take a while though - the first thing to happen will be the death of consumer open source. I posted an article on this to Kuro5hin, and although the poll died, the majority of people agreed with my conclusion that open source isn't viable for consumer software.
Here we somewhat agree, I don't believe open source will every take off for end-user applcations (The Gimp excetped of course).
But I do think it will continue with the writing of drivers and improvement of applications that provide services (like Apache, mySQL, in other words applications used to make end user applications, or provide services, via the web to end users.)
With the rest of your points (lack of funding, lack of innovation, etc.) I think your off base. Similar to Java applets will run everywhere, I believe the open source movement has moved passed the users will update/change etc. the code on thier machines. I think r+d will continue on those applications that provide services (again web servers, db's, etc.) and that the commercial potential will be in tying it toghether as a solution for a customer. The end user won't know what's going on because they'll access these applications via a broweser, or some other interface. Even MS believes this is the future, look at.NET, another attempt at distributed computing.
This is where the battle will be fought next. Will MS be able to market.NET as a unified solution, or will companies like IBM be able to market a collection of open source applications that can do similar things.
"In Hemmah's home, police say they found seven computers and how-to books on computer hacking." -- Boston Globe
So... how much do you want to bet they found O'Reilly books at his house???
Seriously though... this just goes on to prove the lack of experience/education various law authorities have with 'computer crimes'. If one considers how much the FBI & Secret Service abuse ones rights, how can we expect local authorities to be any better?
We, as a technologicaly literate community have to educate both our representatives, authorities, and the public we live with. To look down upon others, or assume they are fanatical or too uneducated to understand, is dangerous.
Slashdot Mirror
This is giving me flashbacks to the mid '80's when software manufacturers would do almost anything to prevent copying. Onc poplular technique was to create 'errors' on a floppy by physically damaging the disk in specific areas. Then a program would run an search for those errors. Didn't take too long for somebody to create a TSR to track and feed the errors to the program.
I'm hoping that in some ways this will blow over as the Music industry realizes the cost of trying to keep up with those willing to break the protection schemes.
Sure one can sue the 'hacker' but then one still has to invest in R&D to come up with another system to protect the property. In time this will get expensive and we'll see simpler systems (e.g. simialr to cd keys or something...) in place.
just another $.02
IEEE Spectrum had a good article on this a few months ago. It might be available for free on thier site (www.ieee.org) but I'm not sure.
Mold/fungs that had been brought up had mutated (due to radiation) and was rather, mmm, tenacious. One astronout said that he didn't want to put his hand into certain areas (i.e. access panels to wiring and such) because it 'was so gross'. I think Wired had an article on this a while ago (thought the memory is fading.)
I honestly don't expect that anything on board was dangerous. Also I do expect that the heat of re-entry killed anything on boared. But its not as simple as, it came from earth so we can deal with it. Hell influenza comes from earth but mutates each year requiring new vaccines. HIV comes from earth but we don't know how to deal with it. As for more complex organisms (like mold) who knows what it can mutate into (from a surviveablity point of view)
just a $.02 rambling
In addition they bring up the idea of donating bandwith on copper.
Interesting page... all sorts 'o' evil ideas.
Any books in stock are considered taxable, so it is now in a publishers best interest to keep stock low. What this means is that 'mid-list' authors (like Spider Robinson, Walter Jon Williams, and others) have thier books go out of print a lot faster. Providing less time for people to notice that the book is out and therefore reducing sales.
So... if demand can be shown, the book might get republished, but most authors are not makeing a lot of money. Hence Harlan's rant; which, for those of us who are actually fans of Mr. Ellison, are not surprised by this. He has held strong opions on artists rights long before the internet came along. -pc
Some nits to pick...
"The problem is that things are getting more and more complicated - very soon, things like SMTP will be obsolete, and only groupware like Exchange will be viable - simply because it's more productive for a company to have groupware."
Exchange is not groupware O.K. I'm biased, as and ex Lotus Domino/Notes programmer. But Exchange does not, in itself, contain enough to be groupware (add on VB and MS .Net, then it gets somewhere.)But this is similar too the O'Reilly book on groupware. In said book the author shows how to use various open source applications towards of the goal of creating groupware.
"There isn't the money in open source to be able to afford to produce things like this - because there's no revenue in giving things away, companies can't afford the programmers to produce the complicated products of the future."
IBM, amonst others would disagree with you. MS's revolution was showing that one can make a lot of money off selling software, regardless of platform. I think Linux will show one can make a decent living off services supporting software. For example, IBM will happily set up Linux and an Apache web server for you. Integrate that with a legacy database, and show you how to develop applications (preferably with Webshpere of course.) Now the OS and web server software are free, but how much money is IBM going to make helping you to set all that up, quite a nice profit. It these sorts of services where companies that support open source software will succeed. Companies, of various sizes, will always need and be willing to pay for experts that can walk in and help them out.
"Even Netscape, bankrolled by one of the world's largest companies, AOL, can't keep up, via open source, with expensive protocols like XSL and so on."
Errr... irrelevent, I would contend that AOL doesn't really care that much about Netscape, execpt to own the technology (hedge against MS) and to own the programmers that go with that tech (another hedge.)
This will take a while though - the first thing to happen will be the death of consumer open source. I posted an article on this to Kuro5hin, and although the poll died, the majority of people agreed with my conclusion that open source isn't viable for consumer software.
Here we somewhat agree, I don't believe open source will every take off for end-user applcations (The Gimp excetped of course).
But I do think it will continue with the writing of drivers and improvement of applications that provide services (like Apache, mySQL, in other words applications used to make end user applications, or provide services, via the web to end users.)
With the rest of your points (lack of funding, lack of innovation, etc.) I think your off base. Similar to Java applets will run everywhere, I believe the open source movement has moved passed the users will update/change etc. the code on thier machines. I think r+d will continue on those applications that provide services (again web servers, db's, etc.) and that the commercial potential will be in tying it toghether as a solution for a customer. The end user won't know what's going on because they'll access these applications via a broweser, or some other interface. Even MS believes this is the future, look at .NET, another attempt at distributed computing. .NET as a unified solution, or will companies like IBM be able to market a collection of open source applications that can do similar things.
The future will be fun... pcThis is where the battle will be fought next. Will MS be able to market
-- Boston Globe
So... how much do you want to bet they found O'Reilly books at his house???
Seriously though... this just goes on to prove the lack of experience/education various law authorities have with 'computer crimes'.
If one considers how much the FBI & Secret Service abuse ones rights, how can we expect local authorities to be any better?
We, as a technologicaly literate community have to educate both our representatives, authorities, and the public we live with.
To look down upon others, or assume they are fanatical or too uneducated to understand, is dangerous.
yet another $.02
p.s. where can I get those how-to books?
He,and his article, showed up on comp.lang.object a couple of months ago. Since then its been a long number of threads on both sides of the issue.
From the OO side, he hasn't done a great job of supporting his critiques on the news group. sigh... can't we all just get along.