I'm not saying the users won't offer the naked archive, if it's possible to do so. All I'm saying is that when a company implements stuff like this they are trying to protect themselves from people who do not abide by the agreements.
As for being the smart thing to do, I think it is. If it curbs illegal copying just a little it has succeeded. Will customers be happy? Probably not very, but they have to realize is that it is not just a game being copied but someones work, and that person deserves compensation if you want to own it.
The model the GPL relies on works, but you can't guarantee that the developer is going to make enough money to live off of, especially for smaller projects. I don't see anything wrong with the developer trying to make a buck off of his product.
To get on the betas you had to agree to a couple of terms. So Microsoft had a system to check and see if people were obeying the terms. There is nothing wrong with that. When a person willfully enters into an agreement with another entity, which is allowed by law, they should expect to be kept watch on. If I agree to work for a company then I expect the company to make sure I'm doing my job. I expect visits from the boss, and stuff like that.
With TransGaming one person bought the game and was giving out copies. That is against the law and probably also breaks the terms of the contract. So they are implementing a way to curb that copying. The only major complaint I see is the checksum problem. A poster above the grandparent said to just md5 the other bytes and ignore the signature area. That shouldn't be to hard to implement. You would need to modify the utilities but those could be released for free back to the public.
Well, for people with low UIDs you don't get as much fanboy kneejerk reactions, or accusations of academic dishonesty from what I can see. It's not a hard and fast rule, but it seems to work most of the time. I don't post often and I try to read articles and such and read some background on it. But maybe I'm wasting my time by doing all of that on/.
Students or not, I find it interesting that three Asian researchers get no credit in the article, while Cohen gets the spotlight. Mentioning their names in the article wouldn't have required much effort. If I were Cohen's colleagues I'd be a bit upset after doing equal, if not more work than him but receiving no recognition from my employer. Something tells me that if they weren't 'foreigners' they'd be sharing equal time with Cohen.
They get a mention in passing right after we are introduced to Cohen. If the article is to be believed Cohen was the one who came up with the idea for the research projecct, which isn't to far out there considering his graphics work. And as I stated earlier he is a pretty decent sized name in graphics considering he won the SIGGRAPH award and chaired a couple confrences
And no, most people quickly reviewing a news blurb aren't going to hunt down the paper on Cohen's website to find out who his other colleagues are.
So what we have is someone who quickly scans the article, comes into to a discussion about it, and then makes a post without having looked at the background information even if it can be found by clicking one link in the article, but is willing to believe another post making it look like Microsoft didn't do much even if researching that post would have led to the conclusion I came up with. But this is/., so I'm not to suprised.
If I were reading an academic paper on linguistics, and discovered it was made possible by a research grant from General Mills, do you think I'd give General Mills credit, or the author(s) of the article?
Thats a different scenario, Microsoft apparently didn't hand out a grant to a university. They handed out a paycheck to its employees. So yes Microsoft does indeed deserve some of the credit. I'm sure Microsoft gets to approve the work done by its researchers. And even if it was just a grant Microsoft would still deserve some credit for providing money for the research to continue, at least thats the way it worked at my university.
Just a hint, if you're going to argue try not to begin with strong statements, then end with something really moronic. It kind of destroys the credibility you were working to build.
Hey, I call them like I see them. I saw someone who didn't do any real research before claiming academic dishonesty posting on a forum. Thats pretty trollish, even if it's during everyone's favorite game, "Lets bash Micro$oft".
The article was written by some tech writer as a PR piece. Cohen was the biggest name on list of people who wrote the paper. Of the other three, two appear to work for Microsoft Research in Asia and the other is a grad student who also works with Microsoft Research in Asia. Oh my God, you mean a lowly tech writer didn't give full credit but the paper did? That's absurd. Oh and if you can't find the paper yourself by going to Cohen's webpage linked in the article its Video Tooning
And by checking the authors we have Yingqing Xu and Heung-Yeung Shum as well as Cohen and Jue Wang from above. So we have 3 PhDs working for Microsoft and a doctoral student working at Microsoft doing research, and its Microsoft stealing credit?
Troll. And you have a fairly low UID compared to most I see in these threads
As pointed out by others in 1984 IBM compatible video cards could handle the graphics.
But if we assume they couldn't, as the author believes here is what Apple could have done. 1) Build an expansion board for the IBM PC, that could handle the necessary graphic capabilities. 2) Include a ROM with the necessary system functions on the same expansion board. 3) Release the OS and the board as a package, it wouldn't be to much of a stretch for Apple to do.
If Apple didn't want to use a custom video card they could have released a expansion board to control the mouse and added the same kind of ROM to it. I mean if Microsoft could produce an expansion board for the Apple II so it had and x86 processor, Apple could have made a board with a ROM on it.
They were selling the stuff and making the source available. I'm thinking someone said something without knowing all the facts. Microsoft as a company knows about the GPL. They may try to spread some FUD, but SFU has been sold and been compliant with the licenses since at least 2000.
Because in the same episode the small person(read midget)explained this. He wanted to do stuff with his own 2 hands. To know that you have done something rather than use your powers to make everything easy. However, Starfleet command probably did analyse Spock's tricorder readings and put it to good use.
The problem is not that the feels a gravity field, but what happens when the box stops. When the box stops, the man continues in the path of motion. He would smack his head into the top of the box. Inertial Dampeners would stop that from happening. So in this example it would be like increasing the gravity so the man's feet never leave the floor. However if the box is moving sideways. The man would assume he is standing still in the box while the box moves. When the box stops he would be thrown into the side of the box. The inertial dampeners would stop this as well. Artificial gravity would keep the sense of down, while the inertial dampeners would keep a sense of not moving.
Because the telekinesis was a side effect of some chemical in the foods the people ate. Since normal food on Enterprise didn't have the chemical it eventually worked its way through their bodies, leaving them non-telekinetic.
the 50G is a measure of acceleration felt by an object. Here it would be 50 * 9.8m/s^2 = 490m/s^2. Inertia is what keeps us at rest or keeps us moving unless acted on by another force. These "inertial dampeners" make it so that when the crew goes from faster than the speed of light to all stop they don't splat against the viewscreen. If you drive your car 60mph and then slam on the brakes the car stops but you travel forward until the seatbelt catches you. Thats your inertia pushing you forward. The inertial dampeners are like "seatbelt fields" that keep everything in place during those manuevers. Artificial gravity is what gives a sense of down in space. You drop something and it goes to your feet, like it would on a planet.
Actually, I wasn't trying to imply that Microsoft is violating copyright law... although it wouldn't surprise me greatly to find out if they did (considering how the basis for DOS was "acquired").
This is not insightful. Schools are not under the federal umbrella, yes there is some money from the federal govt. but its a state concern. Now the states can do what they want with the education system. If you want more federal involvement, write your senators and represenatives and tell them you want a bigger bureaucratic system because it isn't big enough now.
So what state are you from? I don't know of any individual states in the US fighting against Iraq or Afghanistan. Bash the current political powers and get modded up, even if you are wrong on all accounts.
Lets say I own a company that makes X. Now, I own the patent on X, but another company wants to make a product Y that is a lot like X. I sell them a license, they start making Y. I make money off of the license. Everyone's happy. I sue someone for infringing on my patent (they might be they might not be lets leave it to the courts). The court battle is going to cost money, where do I get this money from? From selling X and the money I make from sell the license.
If we audit the books of course its going to show that money paying for the court case, its their money they can do whatever they feel like.
A meter was the distance light traveled in 1/299,792,458 of a second. One second is the time that elapses during 9,192,631,770 (9.192631770 x 109) cycles of the radiation produced by the transition between two levels of the cesium 133 atom. Just thought you would want to know.
Number 1) Java sucks complete ass right now. Number 2) A closed source OS can thrive on two architectures if the applications are open source. Or if there is enough similarities in a closed source app that all that is required is a recompile for the other architecture.
But I use the GNU toolchain on both, so I guess I use GNU/Linux and GNU/Windows but I'm thinking about replacing GNU/Linux with GNU/BSD
Wait, what did you say?
on
BSA IDC FUD
·
· Score: 1
The GPL has no restriction whatsoever regarding the use or download of software.
That's great news, now Microsoft can use the Linux kernel anyway they want. And since the GPL has no restriction whatsoever regarding the use or download of it, they can get away with it too.
Sorry, but you are wrong. If a professional engineer signs of on a design and it fails, that person can be held personally responsible. The company can also be held accountable. For most other professions, if someone screws up the company that that person works for is responsible. Now if you are doing freelance work, then you as a programmer can be held accountable.
These people weren't rounded up because of who they are. They were rounded up because they were combatants, leaders of combatants, or members of group of terrorists. Its more of a military prison than a concentration camp. As far as the "Seig Heil!" goes, if the Nazi's treated the people in its concentration camps as well as the people who are in Quantanimo Bay prison, 6 million Jews wouldn't have died. Sometimes the trolls are those with an incredibly low number.
Running water, flush toliets, and three meals a day seems to be a step up from what someone would think of being a concentration camp. But then again you might not have actually read the link because you are just a coward.
Do you want to do schematic capture (where you draw the circuit in a CAD enviroment) or do you want to be able to use an HDL (hardware description language)? If you want to go the schematic capture you could always build them out of ICs on a breadboard for next to nothing. But if you want to go the HDL way, you need the FPGA and a decent HDL compiler.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not saying the users won't offer the naked archive, if it's possible to do so. All I'm saying is that when a company implements stuff like this they are trying to protect themselves from people who do not abide by the agreements.
As for being the smart thing to do, I think it is. If it curbs illegal copying just a little it has succeeded. Will customers be happy? Probably not very, but they have to realize is that it is not just a game being copied but someones work, and that person deserves compensation if you want to own it.
The model the GPL relies on works, but you can't guarantee that the developer is going to make enough money to live off of, especially for smaller projects. I don't see anything wrong with the developer trying to make a buck off of his product.
To get on the betas you had to agree to a couple of terms. So Microsoft had a system to check and see if people were obeying the terms. There is nothing wrong with that. When a person willfully enters into an agreement with another entity, which is allowed by law, they should expect to be kept watch on. If I agree to work for a company then I expect the company to make sure I'm doing my job. I expect visits from the boss, and stuff like that.
With TransGaming one person bought the game and was giving out copies. That is against the law and probably also breaks the terms of the contract. So they are implementing a way to curb that copying. The only major complaint I see is the checksum problem. A poster above the grandparent said to just md5 the other bytes and ignore the signature area. That shouldn't be to hard to implement. You would need to modify the utilities but those could be released for free back to the public.
Well, for people with low UIDs you don't get as much fanboy kneejerk reactions, or accusations of academic dishonesty from what I can see. It's not a hard and fast rule, but it seems to work most of the time. I don't post often and I try to read articles and such and read some background on it. But maybe I'm wasting my time by doing all of that on /.
Students or not, I find it interesting that three Asian researchers get no credit in the article, while Cohen gets the spotlight. Mentioning their names in the article wouldn't have required much effort. If I were Cohen's colleagues I'd be a bit upset after doing equal, if not more work than him but receiving no recognition from my employer. Something tells me that if they weren't 'foreigners' they'd be sharing equal time with Cohen.
/., so I'm not to suprised.
They get a mention in passing right after we are introduced to Cohen. If the article is to be believed Cohen was the one who came up with the idea for the research projecct, which isn't to far out there considering his graphics work. And as I stated earlier he is a pretty decent sized name in graphics considering he won the SIGGRAPH award and chaired a couple confrences
And no, most people quickly reviewing a news blurb aren't going to hunt down the paper on Cohen's website to find out who his other colleagues are.
So what we have is someone who quickly scans the article, comes into to a discussion about it, and then makes a post without having looked at the background information even if it can be found by clicking one link in the article, but is willing to believe another post making it look like Microsoft didn't do much even if researching that post would have led to the conclusion I came up with. But this is
If I were reading an academic paper on linguistics, and discovered it was made possible by a research grant from General Mills, do you think I'd give General Mills credit, or the author(s) of the article?
Thats a different scenario, Microsoft apparently didn't hand out a grant to a university. They handed out a paycheck to its employees. So yes Microsoft does indeed deserve some of the credit. I'm sure Microsoft gets to approve the work done by its researchers. And even if it was just a grant Microsoft would still deserve some credit for providing money for the research to continue, at least thats the way it worked at my university.
Just a hint, if you're going to argue try not to begin with strong statements, then end with something really moronic. It kind of destroys the credibility you were working to build.
Hey, I call them like I see them. I saw someone who didn't do any real research before claiming academic dishonesty posting on a forum. Thats pretty trollish, even if it's during everyone's favorite game, "Lets bash Micro$oft".
The article was written by some tech writer as a PR piece. Cohen was the biggest name on list of people who wrote the paper. Of the other three, two appear to work for Microsoft Research in Asia and the other is a grad student who also works with Microsoft Research in Asia. Oh my God, you mean a lowly tech writer didn't give full credit but the paper did? That's absurd. Oh and if you can't find the paper yourself by going to Cohen's webpage linked in the article its Video Tooning
And by checking the authors we have Yingqing Xu and Heung-Yeung Shum as well as Cohen and Jue Wang from above. So we have 3 PhDs working for Microsoft and a doctoral student working at Microsoft doing research, and its Microsoft stealing credit?
Troll. And you have a fairly low UID compared to most I see in these threads
As pointed out by others in 1984 IBM compatible video cards could handle the graphics.
But if we assume they couldn't, as the author believes here is what Apple could have done.
1) Build an expansion board for the IBM PC, that could handle the necessary graphic capabilities.
2) Include a ROM with the necessary system functions on the same expansion board.
3) Release the OS and the board as a package, it wouldn't be to much of a stretch for Apple to do.
If Apple didn't want to use a custom video card they could have released a expansion board to control the mouse and added the same kind of ROM to it. I mean if Microsoft could produce an expansion board for the Apple II so it had and x86 processor, Apple could have made a board with a ROM on it.
They were selling the stuff and making the source available. I'm thinking someone said something without knowing all the facts. Microsoft as a company knows about the GPL. They may try to spread some FUD, but SFU has been sold and been compliant with the licenses since at least 2000.
Because in the same episode the small person(read midget)explained this. He wanted to do stuff with his own 2 hands. To know that you have done something rather than use your powers to make everything easy. However, Starfleet command probably did analyse Spock's tricorder readings and put it to good use.
The problem is not that the feels a gravity field, but what happens when the box stops. When the box stops, the man continues in the path of motion. He would smack his head into the top of the box. Inertial Dampeners would stop that from happening. So in this example it would be like increasing the gravity so the man's feet never leave the floor. However if the box is moving sideways. The man would assume he is standing still in the box while the box moves. When the box stops he would be thrown into the side of the box. The inertial dampeners would stop this as well. Artificial gravity would keep the sense of down, while the inertial dampeners would keep a sense of not moving.
Because the telekinesis was a side effect of some chemical in the foods the people ate. Since normal food on Enterprise didn't have the chemical it eventually worked its way through their bodies, leaving them non-telekinetic.
the 50G is a measure of acceleration felt by an object. Here it would be 50 * 9.8m/s^2 = 490m/s^2. Inertia is what keeps us at rest or keeps us moving unless acted on by another force. These "inertial dampeners" make it so that when the crew goes from faster than the speed of light to all stop they don't splat against the viewscreen. If you drive your car 60mph and then slam on the brakes the car stops but you travel forward until the seatbelt catches you. Thats your inertia pushing you forward. The inertial dampeners are like "seatbelt fields" that keep everything in place during those manuevers. Artificial gravity is what gives a sense of down in space. You drop something and it goes to your feet, like it would on a planet.
Actually, I wasn't trying to imply that Microsoft is violating copyright law... although it wouldn't surprise me greatly to find out if they did (considering how the basis for DOS was "acquired").
What, you mean bought?
This is not insightful. Schools are not under the federal umbrella, yes there is some money from the federal govt. but its a state concern. Now the states can do what they want with the education system. If you want more federal involvement, write your senators and represenatives and tell them you want a bigger bureaucratic system because it isn't big enough now.
So what state are you from? I don't know of any individual states in the US fighting against Iraq or Afghanistan. Bash the current political powers and get modded up, even if you are wrong on all accounts.
Lets say I own a company that makes X. Now, I own the patent on X, but another company wants to make a product Y that is a lot like X. I sell them a license, they start making Y. I make money off of the license. Everyone's happy. I sue someone for infringing on my patent (they might be they might not be lets leave it to the courts). The court battle is going to cost money, where do I get this money from? From selling X and the money I make from sell the license.
If we audit the books of course its going to show that money paying for the court case, its their money they can do whatever they feel like.
A meter was the distance light traveled in 1/299,792,458 of a second. One second is the time that elapses during 9,192,631,770 (9.192631770 x 109) cycles of the radiation produced by the transition between two levels of the cesium 133 atom. Just thought you would want to know.
it doesn't suck ass. Server side Java? Only when I have no other way to do something.
Number 1) Java sucks complete ass right now.
Number 2) A closed source OS can thrive on two architectures if the applications are open source. Or if there is enough similarities in a closed source app that all that is required is a recompile for the other architecture.
But I use the GNU toolchain on both, so I guess I use GNU/Linux and GNU/Windows but I'm thinking about replacing GNU/Linux with GNU/BSD
The GPL has no restriction whatsoever regarding the use or download of software.
That's great news, now Microsoft can use the Linux kernel anyway they want. And since the GPL has no restriction whatsoever regarding the use or download of it, they can get away with it too.
My God, VHDL is a peice of cake, and in no way is it low level. This conversation hits close to home. Compter Engineer and proud of it.
Sorry, but you are wrong. If a professional engineer signs of on a design and it fails, that person can be held personally responsible. The company can also be held accountable. For most other professions, if someone screws up the company that that person works for is responsible. Now if you are doing freelance work, then you as a programmer can be held accountable.
what are you talking about? Surrender? We bought the Louisiana "Purchase" from Napoleon because he needed the money to fund his European wars.
Napoleon would have eventually lost it in the eventual surrender to the british, but they did not surrender the Louisiana Purchase to America.
These people weren't rounded up because of who they are. They were rounded up because they were combatants, leaders of combatants, or members of group of terrorists. Its more of a military prison than a concentration camp. As far as the "Seig Heil!" goes, if the Nazi's treated the people in its concentration camps as well as the people who are in Quantanimo Bay prison, 6 million Jews wouldn't have died. Sometimes the trolls are those with an incredibly low number.
Running water, flush toliets, and three meals a day seems to be a step up from what someone would think of being a concentration camp. But then again you might not have actually read the link because you are just a coward.
Do you want to do schematic capture (where you draw the circuit in a CAD enviroment) or do you want to be able to use an HDL (hardware description language)? If you want to go the schematic capture you could always build them out of ICs on a breadboard for next to nothing. But if you want to go the HDL way, you need the FPGA and a decent HDL compiler.