I don't know about APNIC in particular.. but in general, it's getting harder and harder to get provider-independent IP space, and more importantly, the AS# to go with it, unless you are a big, huge provider yourself.
So.. what about some company that wants to set up a datacenter online. They NEED multi-homing, but they don't need thousands of addresses... they are basically shut out of the system. It's getting basically impossible for a small network to multi-home on the internet.
Firstly, there was enough address space to go around.
Because of that, IP addresses were not a commodity. You didn't hoard them; you didn't have to, you could get them if you needed them without too much hassle.
And you did NOT have to be networked to anyone else to get IP addresses assigned to you; it was more like the assignment of MAC addresses... the whole concept was that you had unique address space, period, so if you wanted to internetwork one day, you could.
This has now gone out the window, becuase the Internet is the product unto itself... Things may be restored with IPV6, but I doubt it.. big business will carry the current policies over into the new address space, or at least, try to.
We attempted to do multi-homing in Europe... now, it IS possible to do, but it's hard to find information about how to do it. The IP assignment authority won't hand out a netblock to you.. no, you need the cooperation of your neighboring AS#'s to do it... but you can get an AS# assigned and some space allocated. THey just make it obscure.
First, DMCA also covers mechanisms that control access to a copyrighted work.
Secondly, reading a book is not 'unauthorized copying'.. the INTENT of the book is to be read.
A book, as has been stated so many times before, is not software. It's not licensed to you, it's SOLD to you, and the only thing preventing you from copying it and re-selling it is copyight law.
Software, on the other hand, is contractual, on top of it all.
Regardless of the technical stupidity...
Publishing information about this does qualify as providing a mechanism to circumvent a copy control mechanism.
Can anyone fill us in on this windows folder/file encryption? How does it work? What does it use as a key, and how is that key accessed?
I read it uses AES
I would assume a key/certificate/whatever is stored in the user account profile....
But what prevents Administrator from changing your password, and signing into your account to read your files? I suppose this leaves a trail... but still.
How about we require everyone to carry digital ID, and to present it when entering/leaving any building or public transportation device. We could use a big wireless network to database all this information. That way, everyone automatically has an alibi.
We could even go one step further, out of convenience, and require people to carry location transmitters, so we can track who goes where in the city, after all.. those who aren't doing anything wrong have nothing to fear, right?
It goes without saying that anyone who has a fake pass or refuses to wear a location transmitter must have something to hide, and should therefore be detained and questioned.
Also, all telephone calls, and all conversations (everyone should have to wear a mic), should be taped and databased (with strict privacy laws, of course, only law enforcement officials would be permitted to listen to this stuff in order to protect us). In the case where people use an alternate communication method, that should be recorded as well. Any communication that circumvents these recording devices would be evidence that someone was up to no good, after all, if they aren't doing anything wrong, they have nothing to hide.
As for having many laws... laws DO have meaning, even if not enforced. THey become dangerous laws; tools of those in power to get their way. You see, the more laws there are, the higher the chances are that you broke one or two along the way. And when everyone is guilty of something, it's rather easy for a corrupt system to use that to its advantage.
Okay. Take any big downtown London area, notorious for pickpockets. You have an area with an inordinate amount of crime, in public. When I was there a while ago, the police had funky vans parked in the area, with cameras sticking out of the top, and signs when you enter the square pointing out that police surveilance was underway (and to beware of pickpockets).
In this case, we have something where it's quite obvious that the police are helping to cut down on crime, and make this a safer place for people to hang out.
This is quite different than sticking cameras everywhere 'just in case someone does something bad'.. it's totally different.
To put it differently. If the local gang keeps running up and down my street, smashing everyone's car and throwing rocks at houses, as well as rampant theft, I will not have a problem when the police seal off the block and start asking for ID for people going in and out. Why? Because they are directly addressing a real, current problem.
On the other hand, if they start (a-la Dark Angel) cordoning off sections of the city, and requiring sector-passes in order to move around, 'just in case' there might be crime, that's a totally, completely different situation.
If I say 'CompuShop SUCKS' that's an opinion.
If I say 'CompuShop ripped me off for $500 and regularly fucks over it's customers', thats a statement of fact.
The former cannot get me sued. The latter (if untrue) can.
How does the fact that it's posted on a chat group matter at all?
I wasn't insinuating that MD is not a good option.. I like MD...
I guess my point is that people seem to be using the fact that you can copy to/from the MD without restriction as a reason that it is 'better' than an SDMI player.
For something to stick tunes on to listen to, MD is great. So are many SDMI players.
Err.. also, where ar eyou getting this about mp3 'enhancing what the human ear can decode' and md 'removing what you can't hear'.
That sounds wrong to me.. do you have a url or something explaining it? The 'removing what you can't hear' I know is true.. but where's this enhancing?
But if you were to do serial copying to and from an MD player, you will continually degrade the quality of the music (unless you are doing pure raw digital copies, only possible with certain dual-disc players, a digital spdif cable won't suffice, as that involves decompress/recompress).
Firstly, if it's your project, you can license and re-license it however you want.
Secondly, you can't have your cake and eat it too.
It sounds to me like you basically just don't know what you want. Do you want any changes made and distributed to be shared with everyeone, or do you want peopel to be able to take it and do whatever they want with it, even if it's proprietary and closed? IT's pretty simple.
If you want something in between, write your own license terms.
Nothing is stopping you, as copyright holder, from keeping it under lgpl, but licensing it under a royalties scheme to a 3rd party commercial entity.
First... they use lossy compress. Not so bad in and of itself, but when yo go from mp3 to MD, you decompress/recompress using another compression method (Sony ATRAC I think). So you end up losing even more than you would with the mp3 alone.
Secondly, though many players have digital output, a digital to digital copy between MD players still involves decompress/recompress (The digital output is usually standard SPDIF).. and only expensive decks, I think, let you do actual raw digital copies of minidisc.
All in all, MD is great, except for the quality issues.
I wish Sony had released ( and marketed) a disc-drive for the computer based on MD. I know they existed.. but one compatable with the MD format would have made a huge difference.
Really.. being able to copy music out of it? I couldn't care less really. I already *have* the music on the computer, from where I can copy it to my hearts content.
My beef is quality. I made the mistake of buying an Exonion mp3 discman..... what utter shit.
I mean, I had a listen in the store (to a cd). Sounded fine, great. Didn't think to check the mp3 playback.
They have some low and hipass filters on their mp3 decoding... I tried out some test tones encoded to mp3 at various bitrates. Even at 256.. there was tons of sound that literally was just not there.. dead silence where there should have been sound. I can't for the life of me figure out why they did this. For the record, the same mp3's on my computer sounded great.
OSS has *nothing at all* to do with whether or not there are viruses.
It's the way in which people use their computers that cause virii to spread.
You can be sure, one of the main reasons there isn't a huge spread of virii for linux is a) Not nearly as many machines out there, so it's hard to catch an infection, and there's no motivation for someone to write one.
b) People generally install software from trusted sites, not their friends, not from emails.
Strictly speaking, if I have windows XP, legally, and I then disable all the product-activiation stuff with some kind of crack.. I'm within my rights, yes?
"Virtual Reality" simply means artifically making something seem, well, real.
When applied to a combat situation, this can mean making the body smell, see, and hear things that they would encounter in combat, to prepare their senses for the real thing.
"VR" does not mean "Computer-generated imagery & feelings hacked directly into your brainstem", nor does it have to mean "3d generated graphics with stereoscopic vision and a powerglove".
Even though said soldier obviously KNOWS it's not real, the assault on his senses goes a long way to preparing him for the real thing. That's the point.
With regards to these EULA's, yes... but what about a corporate contract, involving real lawyers, notaries, witnesses, etc?
You can bet your booties the situation would be different then.
If I give you some software, and just say 'here, thanks for the 10 bucks, here's the software' then copyright law applies. I have sold you the work, similar to if you purchased a CD at the record store.
If, on the other hand, I permit you to use the work under a license agreement that we both agree to, then your statements don't hold up. IF that license agreement clearly states that you cannot make archival copies, then you cannot make archival copies. I don't mean click-wrap agreements here, I mean your lawyer and my lawyer going over them, signatures, witnesses, etc... like a REAL contract.
IN this case, I have NOT 'sold' you a work protected by copyright. I have licensed you the use of my intellectual property under certain, specific terms.
Your statements about transfer of license and archival backups is not strictly true.
Yes, under straight copyright law, they are true.
However..... there is such thing as a 'contract'. Now.. I'm not talking about stupid 'click-wrap' agreements.. I'm talking about real contracts, usually the result of some negotiation.
Look at, say, a large cray. There was a company a while ago selling an old cray...thing was, they couldn't provide the OS with it.. their license to uset he software was non-transferable. THis is not 'unfair' or any such thing. An army of lawyers agreed to these terms in the first place when millions of dollars were shelled out for the deal.
If I have software, copyright protects me.. but also, *I* protect me. I could get lawyers involved, and draw up a contract, and discuss it with you, to show how you are not allowed to use this software except in explicity ways. We can agree that you can't make backup copies, that you can't do this or that or the other thing.. and we can have this gone over in detail, with witnesses and everything.
And, if we do that, and you breach that contract... good luck showing in a court how you were 'allowed' to do that because 'copyright law says you are'.
In short, what you are forgetting is that copyight law only sets some guaranteed protections. A contract can always add additional restrictions; that's why you have to renew your MS software. First-sale doctrine does not apply when software is not sold, but licensed.
I have a problem with click-wrap agreements that are given the full force of law as a binding contract. Thats' my problem. If they want to impsoe specific terms, do it in a face to face manner.
By your silly definition, Mr. Editor,
on
Freedom or Power?
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
true freedom would mean I can't be thrown in jail for murdering a bus full of kids.
Not able to license however I want? Get real.
Look. I'll be the first to advocate the use of free/oss software. Stuff that the community can use and build upon. In fact, in more than just software, I'm in favor of nothing really stopping people from doing things for the common good.
However. If I write software, with my time, and my effort, then nobody is going to tell ME under what terms I may let someone else use it. Period.
I'm not a fan of over-broad IP law, but I'm also not an advocate of ditching it altogether.
I'm not totally opposed to communism.. but that's basically what Stallman wants. Communist hippie software (literally). Great. Good for him. Communies can be fantastic in the right circumstances, with the right group of people.
But the majority of the world is based upon power. Supply and demand, money, greed, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know about APNIC in particular.. but in general, it's getting harder and harder to get provider-independent IP space, and more importantly, the AS# to go with it, unless you are a big, huge provider yourself.
So.. what about some company that wants to set up a datacenter online. They NEED multi-homing, but they don't need thousands of addresses... they are basically shut out of the system. It's getting basically impossible for a small network to multi-home on the internet.
It IS hurting the Internet... most definately.
If we look back at the way things used to work...
Firstly, there was enough address space to go around.
Because of that, IP addresses were not a commodity. You didn't hoard them; you didn't have to, you could get them if you needed them without too much hassle.
And you did NOT have to be networked to anyone else to get IP addresses assigned to you; it was more like the assignment of MAC addresses... the whole concept was that you had unique address space, period, so if you wanted to internetwork one day, you could.
This has now gone out the window, becuase the Internet is the product unto itself... Things may be restored with IPV6, but I doubt it.. big business will carry the current policies over into the new address space, or at least, try to.
We attempted to do multi-homing in Europe... now, it IS possible to do, but it's hard to find information about how to do it. The IP assignment authority won't hand out a netblock to you.. no, you need the cooperation of your neighboring AS#'s to do it... but you can get an AS# assigned and some space allocated. THey just make it obscure.
First, DMCA also covers mechanisms that control access to a copyrighted work.
Secondly, reading a book is not 'unauthorized copying'.. the INTENT of the book is to be read.
A book, as has been stated so many times before, is not software. It's not licensed to you, it's SOLD to you, and the only thing preventing you from copying it and re-selling it is copyight law.
Software, on the other hand, is contractual, on top of it all.
Providing instructions or a mechanism for circumventing a copy control mechanism that controls access to a work is a violation of the DMCA.
Regardless of the technical stupidity...
Publishing information about this does qualify as providing a mechanism to circumvent a copy control mechanism.
Can anyone fill us in on this windows folder/file encryption? How does it work? What does it use as a key, and how is that key accessed?
I read it uses AES
I would assume a key/certificate/whatever is stored in the user account profile....
But what prevents Administrator from changing your password, and signing into your account to read your files? I suppose this leaves a trail... but still.
Because embedded XP probably has nothing to do with the user-interface features of Windows XP.
Embedded operating systems provide a framework for custom applications to run.
And before you 'trust' them more than you do MS, do you even know who they are? Bold statement.
Embedded systems in ATM's are rigorously programmed applications. THe fact that they move to a different OS is no big deal.
Embedded could be thought of as 'a computer inside something that's not a computer'.
The computer that handles the engine in modern cars, for instance.
Embedded does not mean 'small and fast'.
Where on earth did you get the '60% of all embedded systems are DOS and the Linux??
Most embedded systems are QNX, VXWorks, and other, traditional real-time operating systems, or hand-written from scratch.
RTLinux is a relative newcomer.
Or do you think 'embedded' means 'small PC' or 'handheld pc'? It doesn't.
How about we require everyone to carry digital ID, and to present it when entering/leaving any building or public transportation device. We could use a big wireless network to database all this information. That way, everyone automatically has an alibi.
We could even go one step further, out of convenience, and require people to carry location transmitters, so we can track who goes where in the city, after all.. those who aren't doing anything wrong have nothing to fear, right?
It goes without saying that anyone who has a fake pass or refuses to wear a location transmitter must have something to hide, and should therefore be detained and questioned.
Also, all telephone calls, and all conversations (everyone should have to wear a mic), should be taped and databased (with strict privacy laws, of course, only law enforcement officials would be permitted to listen to this stuff in order to protect us). In the case where people use an alternate communication method, that should be recorded as well. Any communication that circumvents these recording devices would be evidence that someone was up to no good, after all, if they aren't doing anything wrong, they have nothing to hide.
As for having many laws... laws DO have meaning, even if not enforced. THey become dangerous laws; tools of those in power to get their way. You see, the more laws there are, the higher the chances are that you broke one or two along the way. And when everyone is guilty of something, it's rather easy for a corrupt system to use that to its advantage.
Okay. Take any big downtown London area, notorious for pickpockets. You have an area with an inordinate amount of crime, in public. When I was there a while ago, the police had funky vans parked in the area, with cameras sticking out of the top, and signs when you enter the square pointing out that police surveilance was underway (and to beware of pickpockets).
In this case, we have something where it's quite obvious that the police are helping to cut down on crime, and make this a safer place for people to hang out.
This is quite different than sticking cameras everywhere 'just in case someone does something bad'.. it's totally different.
To put it differently. If the local gang keeps running up and down my street, smashing everyone's car and throwing rocks at houses, as well as rampant theft, I will not have a problem when the police seal off the block and start asking for ID for people going in and out. Why? Because they are directly addressing a real, current problem.
On the other hand, if they start (a-la Dark Angel) cordoning off sections of the city, and requiring sector-passes in order to move around, 'just in case' there might be crime, that's a totally, completely different situation.
I'd think it would be obvious.
If I say 'CompuShop SUCKS' that's an opinion.
If I say 'CompuShop ripped me off for $500 and regularly fucks over it's customers', thats a statement of fact.
The former cannot get me sued. The latter (if untrue) can.
How does the fact that it's posted on a chat group matter at all?
I wasn't insinuating that MD is not a good option.. I like MD...
I guess my point is that people seem to be using the fact that you can copy to/from the MD without restriction as a reason that it is 'better' than an SDMI player.
For something to stick tunes on to listen to, MD is great. So are many SDMI players.
Err.. also, where ar eyou getting this about mp3 'enhancing what the human ear can decode' and md 'removing what you can't hear'.
That sounds wrong to me.. do you have a url or something explaining it? The 'removing what you can't hear' I know is true.. but where's this enhancing?
But if you were to do serial copying to and from an MD player, you will continually degrade the quality of the music (unless you are doing pure raw digital copies, only possible with certain dual-disc players, a digital spdif cable won't suffice, as that involves decompress/recompress).
Firstly, if it's your project, you can license and re-license it however you want.
Secondly, you can't have your cake and eat it too.
It sounds to me like you basically just don't know what you want. Do you want any changes made and distributed to be shared with everyeone, or do you want peopel to be able to take it and do whatever they want with it, even if it's proprietary and closed? IT's pretty simple.
If you want something in between, write your own license terms.
Nothing is stopping you, as copyright holder, from keeping it under lgpl, but licensing it under a royalties scheme to a 3rd party commercial entity.
First... they use lossy compress. Not so bad in and of itself, but when yo go from mp3 to MD, you decompress/recompress using another compression method (Sony ATRAC I think). So you end up losing even more than you would with the mp3 alone.
Secondly, though many players have digital output, a digital to digital copy between MD players still involves decompress/recompress (The digital output is usually standard SPDIF).. and only expensive decks, I think, let you do actual raw digital copies of minidisc.
All in all, MD is great, except for the quality issues.
I wish Sony had released ( and marketed) a disc-drive for the computer based on MD. I know they existed.. but one compatable with the MD format would have made a huge difference.
Really.. being able to copy music out of it? I couldn't care less really. I already *have* the music on the computer, from where I can copy it to my hearts content.
My beef is quality. I made the mistake of buying an Exonion mp3 discman..... what utter shit.
I mean, I had a listen in the store (to a cd). Sounded fine, great. Didn't think to check the mp3 playback.
They have some low and hipass filters on their mp3 decoding... I tried out some test tones encoded to mp3 at various bitrates. Even at 256.. there was tons of sound that literally was just not there.. dead silence where there should have been sound. I can't for the life of me figure out why they did this. For the record, the same mp3's on my computer sounded great.
So my biggest concern would be sound quality.
Well.. no. Interaction is yet another element that can add to the realism of the situation. It's not required for something to be 'VR'
OSS has *nothing at all* to do with whether or not there are viruses.
It's the way in which people use their computers that cause virii to spread.
You can be sure, one of the main reasons there isn't a huge spread of virii for linux is a) Not nearly as many machines out there, so it's hard to catch an infection, and there's no motivation for someone to write one.
b) People generally install software from trusted sites, not their friends, not from emails.
Open-source commie hippies... sheesh.
Strictly speaking, if I have windows XP, legally, and I then disable all the product-activiation stuff with some kind of crack.. I'm within my rights, yes?
"Virtual Reality" simply means artifically making something seem, well, real.
When applied to a combat situation, this can mean making the body smell, see, and hear things that they would encounter in combat, to prepare their senses for the real thing.
"VR" does not mean "Computer-generated imagery & feelings hacked directly into your brainstem", nor does it have to mean "3d generated graphics with stereoscopic vision and a powerglove".
Even though said soldier obviously KNOWS it's not real, the assault on his senses goes a long way to preparing him for the real thing. That's the point.
With regards to these EULA's, yes... but what about a corporate contract, involving real lawyers, notaries, witnesses, etc?
You can bet your booties the situation would be different then.
How is building an ethernet bridge something new? I mean, great that they packaged it up like this...
but this is nothing new.
Some mention KALI.. kali was based on bridging IPX I believe....
Of course, MS could always just make the damn game support tcp/ip in the first place...
how this is any different than, say, setting up an ethernet bridge?
How is this specific to the xbox?
If I give you some software, and just say 'here, thanks for the 10 bucks, here's the software' then copyright law applies. I have sold you the work, similar to if you purchased a CD at the record store.
If, on the other hand, I permit you to use the work under a license agreement that we both agree to, then your statements don't hold up. IF that license agreement clearly states that you cannot make archival copies, then you cannot make archival copies. I don't mean click-wrap agreements here, I mean your lawyer and my lawyer going over them, signatures, witnesses, etc... like a REAL contract.
IN this case, I have NOT 'sold' you a work protected by copyright. I have licensed you the use of my intellectual property under certain, specific terms.
Your statements about transfer of license and archival backups is not strictly true.
.thing was, they couldn't provide the OS with it.. their license to uset he software was non-transferable. THis is not 'unfair' or any such thing. An army of lawyers agreed to these terms in the first place when millions of dollars were shelled out for the deal.
Yes, under straight copyright law, they are true.
However..... there is such thing as a 'contract'. Now.. I'm not talking about stupid 'click-wrap' agreements.. I'm talking about real contracts, usually the result of some negotiation.
Look at, say, a large cray. There was a company a while ago selling an old cray..
If I have software, copyright protects me.. but also, *I* protect me. I could get lawyers involved, and draw up a contract, and discuss it with you, to show how you are not allowed to use this software except in explicity ways. We can agree that you can't make backup copies, that you can't do this or that or the other thing.. and we can have this gone over in detail, with witnesses and everything.
And, if we do that, and you breach that contract... good luck showing in a court how you were 'allowed' to do that because 'copyright law says you are'.
In short, what you are forgetting is that copyight law only sets some guaranteed protections. A contract can always add additional restrictions; that's why you have to renew your MS software. First-sale doctrine does not apply when software is not sold, but licensed.
I have a problem with click-wrap agreements that are given the full force of law as a binding contract. Thats' my problem. If they want to impsoe specific terms, do it in a face to face manner.
true freedom would mean I can't be thrown in jail for murdering a bus full of kids.
Not able to license however I want? Get real.
Look. I'll be the first to advocate the use of free/oss software. Stuff that the community can use and build upon. In fact, in more than just software, I'm in favor of nothing really stopping people from doing things for the common good.
However. If I write software, with my time, and my effort, then nobody is going to tell ME under what terms I may let someone else use it. Period.
I'm not a fan of over-broad IP law, but I'm also not an advocate of ditching it altogether.
I'm not totally opposed to communism.. but that's basically what Stallman wants. Communist hippie software (literally). Great. Good for him. Communies can be fantastic in the right circumstances, with the right group of people.
But the majority of the world is based upon power. Supply and demand, money, greed, etc.