Because, dimwit, from the engineering side, it's ALWAYS bits. Memory chips are measured in BITS. We put a bunch of them together (a couple 4x128mbit's ) to make one megaBYTE, for you, the consumer who wouldn't understand bits.
Bits are more accurate. More quantifiable.
Traditionally, Kilobyte refers to 1000 bytes when dealing with data transmission, and 1024 bytes when dealing with memory. Now, when dealing with software written by those who don't know this, it could be either.
But a kilobit is always a kilobit. 1000 bits.
Ethernet is 100 MegaBIT because it's channel usage is measured in bits Things go on and off it a bit at a time. and NOT always in even increments of 8. Same for gigabit.
The SAME FOR THE WAY hard drives encode data! What is actually stored on the drive has little directly to do with what you think is stored there. All kinds of encoding is used. Each bit may be comprised of three bits on the platter....
To Mattel, it's a DATA file that is part of their copyrighted work. You just happen to have a way to convert that back into plaintext.
However.. we could very EASILY.. VERY EASILY argue that the encryption of this list is in no way a copyright protection mechanism. We can copy their software byte for byte.
If you are into the story at all, individual episodes are quite ejoyable, but are far from a complete story. As some say, watching the first few seasons is like reading lord of the rings. It's an epic. I don't WANT stand-alone. I don't believe you can convey real meaning in 35 minutes of TV. Unlike a soap-opera, B5 was thought out in it's entirety BEFORE they were aired. The whole story was written, it just took a while to tell
And though I'm not sure it really is illegal, it is also true that the port you are referring to is a non-standard connector. Gender-reversed, or reverse thread, or some such thing, as required by FCC.
I'm positive you know what you are talking about.. but from my experience, it is not necessary nor illegal to switch out antennae so long as you stay within spec. Granted, joe average may not know how to do this, and he shouldn't, but you are perfectly within your rights to 'modify' gear so long as you stay within spec.
It is illegal to sell a device that is not certified. It is not completely illegal to use a device that is not certified.
It's not as simple as power output. The radiation pattern is equally important.
I know that a 100mW card can do links of over 10km, given the right antennae (NO additional amplifiers, just good yagis)
Antennae don't boost power output, they just focus that power.
As for interference, it means the units are supposed to use a non-deterministic hopping pattern, such that they don't overly interfere with each other. If frequencies are found to be bad, they are skipped. The idea is, the hopping sequence of various radios adjusts so they all get their fair share.
You know what? As much as people say 'CSS doesn't prevent copying...' Well. Let's just look at it this way.
Did people make digital copies of DVD *before* DeCSS came along? *NO*. Why not? BECAUSE IT WAS ENCRYPTED.
Sure.. SOME pirates can purchase the $$$ equipment to do it... but does joe average univeristy kid? NO!
Now.. what with stuff like DivX (the algorithm, not the player) we see poeple slamming amazing quality movies (not quite DVD, but really really good) on a 650MB cdr.. and those movies came from where? converted from raw, decrypted dvd data.
So, actually, full-length movie copying *IS* just around the corner. Many people already have sizeable collections. And this is JUST the beginning.
A good analogy.. He let some guy borrow his map, yellow pages, and phone book. It's not his fault if the guy ends up robbing a store after learning it's location.
It can be illegal when the whole point of the judges injunction is to PREVENT THE SOFTWARE FROM BEING DISTRIBUTED.
He can ban you from discussing it with anyone. He can ban you from telling someone where to get it. He can ban you from communicating it's wherabouts by any means, to anyone. Until the trial is over, of course.
It means that if you are running a website linking ot the mateiral and also use the material to copy a DVD, you are guilty of:
One count of posession a pirated copy of a protected work. One count of copying a protected work. One count of circumventing the protective measures around the protected work. One count of running software capable of circumventing the protective measures around the protected owrk. One count of posessing above software. One count of distributing said software.
And probably one count of illegal use of a computer, as the computer is now a 'tool of crime' or sometehing.
The deep linking ruling had only to do with whether or not a website can file suit against another website for providing 'deep links' into it's content.
ie: Some ticketing website providing 'deep links' directly to Ticketmaster.com's ordering page for the appropriate tickets.
Ticketmaster said that this was illegal, as the other site is using their own content in an unapproved manner. The judge said that as long as it is clear that the user is being sent to a different site, and the information is not presented is if it were it's own, it's fine.
Wow. Too many pronouns.. anyway...
As for the 'free speech' argument.
Remember, a judge can *ALSO* censor an original work if it is in question, whether it is source code or not. He can attest that the original authors of that work cannot legally publish the information contained in the work.
It is plainly accepted that ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking the law.
It is logical, then, that it is every man's duty to understand and obey the law.
Why the, in court, are we so often informed that we are not capable of understanding these laws, and that we require a professional lawyer to understand it for us? If the courts admit we cannot legally know the law, then how can they hold us responsible for breaking it?
IANAL, but today's American society is SO litigous that I feel I must clearly state that IANAL lest someone take my well-worded advice as true legal advice and sues my ass for pretending to be a lawyer.
Don't abuse the 'fair use'. There isn't a 'fair use' clause as an exception to every law.
In copyright, fair use deals with what is a 'fair' use of a copyrighted work.
Now.. realize that the DeCSS caseis not directly a copyright case, but a DMCA cas, whereby the tools who's primary purpose is to circumvent a copy control mechanism are *illegal*. So. Source, describing the method by which this can be done may be protected speech, but actual compiled code to do it may not be.
Here's why DMCA is so fucked up. Although it falls under 'fair use' for you to copy your DVD, copying that DVD (which you are allowed) requires you to circumvent a copy control mechanism, which requires the useof an ILLEGAL tool, and is an ILLEGAL act. So although having the copy is legal, the act of circumventing the copy protection to make that copy is illegal. That's messed up.
Just because speech is protected does not mean you are not responsible for what you say. Perhaps they cannot stop DeCSS from spreading around the net, not unless some major national security issues are at stake, but they certainlyc oudl try to prosecute those who illegally obtainedthe information they described in their 'speech' (if it was, indeed, illegal, which of course, it isn't)
The obvious thing that comes out now is people discussing how this affects DeCSS.
Think of it this way.
If the DeCSS guys, instead of publishing DeCSS software, had simply written a technical essay about their reverse engineering efforts and how dvd encryption worked, including some keys... what would happen? Would they be sued under DMCA? Certainly not with as much zeal as they are now... and not withe the same clauses.
Attacking them for writing a doucment would be very taboo... perhaps they could be sued if they obtained the information illegally... but....
if they write software, and distribute it, there is a clear 'product' that is used to defeat a copy protection mechanism. That IS what it does (or at least, according to THEM... we all know that it's not really copy protection. Then again... could you or I copy dvd's with our measly hardware without it?;)
Now.. this line between a written essay and the software that implements the discussion of that essay is blurred. The source code IS now speech, just like the essay woudl be (until a higher court decides otherwise)
They also make an analogy that I liked.
Musicians can communicate with sheet music. Indeed, this is a technical, logical symbolic series of instructions to musicians. To normal people, i'ts gobbledygook, but to a musician, it's language, pure and simple.
To a programmer, C is a langauge, not a bunch of machine-readable gobbldygook. The easiest way for a programmer to describe to another programmer something like how his new found decryption system works is to show code. Writing a textual description would not be as effective a communication means. Therefore, it's speech. Just as a composer's sheet music is protected speech.
Which is better usually has a great deal more to do with the ability of the respective companies to manage their networks and their commitment to quality service.
yes, with DSl, most bottlenecks happen at the telco, where it is easier to deal with bottlenecks. however.. the ways telco's build their networks (many places would be surprised how un-centralized telco DSL services are) such that there are many nocs all around town.. and network congestion is as much a problem as anywhere else.
Does a cable 'modem' modulate? Yes. It modulates a baseband signal like ethernet up into RF for cable transmission. Does it demodulate? yes. It demodulates RF back into baseband for ethernet transmission.
1) find an ISP to provide you with IP. 2) Lease a dry pair off the telco, from your ISP to your end location. Make sure it's within the allowable distance limits for adsl 3) Get the DSL gear, and away you go.
Not without a 2 pair, balanced line you can't. And the line quality required is higher for T1. And if I'm not mistaken, there are other line drivers needed as well.
What makes the line between you and your friends house unsuitable is there IS no line between you and your friends house. Not unless the telco is nice and punches it down in the right places.
With DSL at your house, the telco has a DSL modem on the other end of the line, and you have one on your end. This is someone doing the same thing, but leaving the telco out of it.
To put it differently, DSL is just a service that is provided over standard telco copper (just like dialtone service for your voice calls). Nothing prevents you from ordering 'dead' lines and doing what you want with them.
Slashdot Mirror
Because, dimwit, from the engineering side, it's ALWAYS bits.
Memory chips are measured in BITS. We put a bunch of them together (a couple 4x128mbit's ) to make one megaBYTE, for you, the consumer who wouldn't understand bits.
Bits are more accurate. More quantifiable.
Traditionally, Kilobyte refers to 1000 bytes when dealing with data transmission, and 1024 bytes when dealing with memory.
Now, when dealing with software written by those who don't know this, it could be either.
But a kilobit is always a kilobit. 1000 bits.
Ethernet is 100 MegaBIT because it's channel usage is measured in bits Things go on and off it a bit at a time. and NOT always in even increments of 8. Same for gigabit.
The SAME FOR THE WAY hard drives encode data! What is actually stored on the drive has little directly to do with what you think is stored there. All kinds of encoding is used. Each bit may be comprised of three bits on the platter....
To you it's an encrypted list of plaintext.
To Mattel, it's a DATA file that is part of their copyrighted work. You just happen to have a way to convert that back into plaintext.
However.. we could very EASILY.. VERY EASILY argue that the encryption of this list is in no way a copyright protection mechanism. We can copy their software byte for byte.
If you are into the story at all, individual episodes are quite ejoyable, but are far from a complete story. As some say, watching the first few seasons is like reading lord of the rings. It's an epic. I don't WANT stand-alone. I don't believe you can convey real meaning in 35 minutes of TV. Unlike a soap-opera, B5 was thought out in it's entirety BEFORE they were aired. The whole story was written, it just took a while to tell
And though I'm not sure it really is illegal, it is also true that the port you are referring to is a non-standard connector. Gender-reversed, or reverse thread, or some such thing, as required by FCC.
I'm positive you know what you are talking about.. but from my experience, it is not necessary nor illegal to switch out antennae so long as you stay within spec. Granted, joe average may not know how to do this, and he shouldn't, but you are perfectly within your rights to 'modify' gear so long as you stay within spec.
It is illegal to sell a device that is not certified. It is not completely illegal to use a device that is not certified.
It's not as simple as power output. The radiation pattern is equally important.
I know that a 100mW card can do links of over 10km, given the right antennae (NO additional amplifiers, just good yagis)
Antennae don't boost power output, they just focus that power.
As for interference, it means the units are supposed to use a non-deterministic hopping pattern, such that they don't overly interfere with each other. If frequencies are found to be bad, they are skipped. The idea is, the hopping sequence of various radios adjusts so they all get their fair share.
Because... Consumer = Citizen = The majority.
"Corporations" and other 'legal entities' are secondary to the Citizen (or at least, should be).
People do not exist to do what companies want, companies exist to do what people want.
You know what? As much as people say 'CSS doesn't prevent copying...'
Well. Let's just look at it this way.
Did people make digital copies of DVD *before* DeCSS came along? *NO*. Why not? BECAUSE IT WAS ENCRYPTED.
Sure.. SOME pirates can purchase the $$$ equipment to do it... but does joe average univeristy kid? NO!
Now.. what with stuff like DivX (the algorithm, not the player) we see poeple slamming amazing quality movies (not quite DVD, but really really good) on a 650MB cdr.. and those movies came from where? converted from raw, decrypted dvd data.
So, actually, full-length movie copying *IS* just around the corner. Many people already have sizeable collections. And this is JUST the beginning.
A good analogy.. He let some guy borrow his map, yellow pages, and phone book. It's not his fault if the guy ends up robbing a store after learning it's location.
It can be illegal when the whole point of the judges injunction is to PREVENT THE SOFTWARE FROM BEING DISTRIBUTED.
He can ban you from discussing it with anyone. He can ban you from telling someone where to get it. He can ban you from communicating it's wherabouts by any means, to anyone.
Until the trial is over, of course.
The courts are not 'supporting' this view. The trial has NOT happened yet, and NOTHING has been passed.
Preliminary injunctions are to keep things alright UNTIL THE TRIAL can determine what is legal and what is not.
It is true that, *IF* the MPAA is correct, and this is illegal, that they stand to lose a lot more than the defendant.
This is not 'unconstitutional'. It is part of due process.
It means that if you are running a website linking ot the mateiral and also use the material to copy a DVD, you are guilty of:
One count of posession a pirated copy of a protected work.
One count of copying a protected work.
One count of circumventing the protective measures around the protected work.
One count of running software capable of circumventing the protective measures around the protected owrk.
One count of posessing above software.
One count of distributing said software.
And probably one count of illegal use of a computer, as the computer is now a 'tool of crime' or sometehing.
The deep linking ruling had only to do with whether or not a website can file suit against another website for providing 'deep links' into it's content.
ie: Some ticketing website providing 'deep links' directly to Ticketmaster.com's ordering page for the appropriate tickets.
Ticketmaster said that this was illegal, as the other site is using their own content in an unapproved manner.
The judge said that as long as it is clear that the user is being sent to a different site, and the information is not presented is if it were it's own, it's fine.
Wow. Too many pronouns.. anyway...
As for the 'free speech' argument.
Remember, a judge can *ALSO* censor an original work if it is in question, whether it is source code or not. He can attest that the original authors of that work cannot legally publish the information contained in the work.
It is plainly accepted that ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking the law.
It is logical, then, that it is every man's duty to understand and obey the law.
Why the, in court, are we so often informed that we are not capable of understanding these laws, and that we require a professional lawyer to understand it for us? If the courts admit we cannot legally know the law, then how can they hold us responsible for breaking it?
IANAL, but today's American society is SO litigous that I feel I must clearly state that IANAL lest someone take my well-worded advice as true legal advice and sues my ass for pretending to be a lawyer.
IANAL.
Don't abuse the 'fair use'. There isn't a 'fair use' clause as an exception to every law.
In copyright, fair use deals with what is a 'fair' use of a copyrighted work.
Now.. realize that the DeCSS caseis not directly a copyright case, but a DMCA cas, whereby the tools who's primary purpose is to circumvent a copy control mechanism are *illegal*.
So. Source, describing the method by which this can be done may be protected speech, but actual compiled code to do it may not be.
Here's why DMCA is so fucked up.
Although it falls under 'fair use' for you to copy your DVD, copying that DVD (which you are allowed) requires you to circumvent a copy control mechanism, which requires the useof an ILLEGAL tool, and is an ILLEGAL act. So although having the copy is legal, the act of circumventing the copy protection to make that copy is illegal.
That's messed up.
Just because speech is protected does not mean you are not responsible for what you say.
Perhaps they cannot stop DeCSS from spreading around the net, not unless some major national security issues are at stake, but they certainlyc oudl try to prosecute those who illegally obtainedthe information they described in their 'speech' (if it was, indeed, illegal, which of course, it isn't)
The obvious thing that comes out now is people discussing how this affects DeCSS.
;)
Think of it this way.
If the DeCSS guys, instead of publishing DeCSS software, had simply written a technical essay about their reverse engineering efforts and how dvd encryption worked, including some keys... what would happen? Would they be sued under DMCA? Certainly not with as much zeal as they are now... and not withe the same clauses.
Attacking them for writing a doucment would be very taboo... perhaps they could be sued if they obtained the information illegally... but....
if they write software, and distribute it, there is a clear 'product' that is used to defeat a copy protection mechanism. That IS what it does (or at least, according to THEM... we all know that it's not really copy protection. Then again... could you or I copy dvd's with our measly hardware without it?
Now.. this line between a written essay and the software that implements the discussion of that essay is blurred. The source code IS now speech, just like the essay woudl be (until a higher court decides otherwise)
They also make an analogy that I liked.
Musicians can communicate with sheet music. Indeed, this is a technical, logical symbolic series of instructions to musicians. To normal people, i'ts gobbledygook, but to a musician, it's language, pure and simple.
To a programmer, C is a langauge, not a bunch of machine-readable gobbldygook. The easiest way for a programmer to describe to another programmer something like how his new found decryption system works is to show code. Writing a textual description would not be as effective a communication means. Therefore, it's speech. Just as a composer's sheet music is protected speech.
Which is better usually has a great deal more to do with the ability of the respective companies to manage their networks and their commitment to quality service.
yes, with DSl, most bottlenecks happen at the telco, where it is easier to deal with bottlenecks. however.. the ways telco's build their networks (many places would be surprised how un-centralized telco DSL services are) such that there are many nocs all around town.. and network congestion is as much a problem as anywhere else.
Also, cable technically has more bandwidth.
Take your pick.
MODEM: acronym for modulator/demodulator.
Does a cable 'modem' modulate? Yes. It modulates a baseband signal like ethernet up into RF for cable transmission.
Does it demodulate? yes. It demodulates RF back into baseband for ethernet transmission.
So it most definately is a modem!
What is the distance between the two locations?
no updating required. DSL works over plain bare copper.
1) find an ISP to provide you with IP.
2) Lease a dry pair off the telco, from your ISP to your end location. Make sure it's within the allowable distance limits for adsl
3) Get the DSL gear, and away you go.
Not without a 2 pair, balanced line you can't.
And the line quality required is higher for T1.
And if I'm not mistaken, there are other line drivers needed as well.
Nothing is different. It's the same line.
What makes the line between you and your friends house unsuitable is there IS no line between you and your friends house. Not unless the telco is nice and punches it down in the right places.
With DSL at your house, the telco has a DSL modem on the other end of the line, and you have one on your end. This is someone doing the same thing, but leaving the telco out of it.
To put it differently, DSL is just a service that is provided over standard telco copper (just like dialtone service for your voice calls).
Nothing prevents you from ordering 'dead' lines and doing what you want with them.