Perhaps put very simply.. say you find a file full of e-mail addresses followed by md5 codes, e.g. example@example.com 5eb63bbbe01eeed093cb22bb8f5acdc3
You deduce that they may be hashed login codes, so you run your MD5 hacking tool and find the password to be either "hello world" or "flurblgrabl". You enter either "hello world" or "flurblgrabl", and you're in.
Now let's say you find instead: example@example.com 5fc627d07b78d646f67411685c0591e8
You run your MD5 hacking tool and find the password to be a rather cryptic "hBd91qh0u1Zl13-12931" (it isn't, I can't be bothered getting an actual collision). Hey, must be somebody's strong password, right? So you enter that as the password, and the site politely tells you to piss off.
So what went wrong? The site used a salt. I'll leave it to the clever chaps here to figure out the 'salt' used, but suffice to say that in practical applications the salt will be sufficiently complex to figure out (while ridiculously easy to implement; the simplest implementation simply adds a fixed set of characters to the password string) that finding collisions for the stored MD5 gets you nowhere.
Of course you might run into a problem where you allow the user - either by lack of recognizing the problem or due to a bug in verification code - to enter an empty password. In that case, at the very least with the simple implementations, the MD5 would be an MD5 of the salt itself. Run an attack against that, take the results (potential salts), now run an attack against all the other MD5 signatures with the found potential salts tacked on until you get matching MD5s. Now the correct salt has been identified, and the MD5s not just collided against, but completely identified. Now you can use that same information on other sites, and not have to worry about any salts they might use.
So what these developers are proposing is that I can have their application, but at the cost of my browser running like shit going forward.
Your 'but' is disingenuous considering you can disable the toolbar option in any installer of an application worth the bother. If what you're installing includes it whether you like it or not, I'd question that application developer's ethics.
Not to mention, they can sell ads to make money. Ads on the webpage that hosts the installer as well as in app ads. Lets stop pretending that toolbars are the only way to monetize free software or that its remotely acceptable way of doing business.
Nobody's saying they're the only way. In fact, a lot of the installers these days will push Google Chrome on people instead. Chrome gets lauded around these parts (except for people who prefer their FireFox add-ons; myself included), so I guess that one would be 'okay'?
If ads worked as well as you're suggesting, I'd imagine the authors would use them. But I can't remember the last time I worked in an application that pushed ads out into the interface and breathed a sigh of relief that at the very least the author didn't try pushing a toolbar on me. I can easily find threads in which users ask for, and receive, ways to disable those ads, however - from modifying the hosts file right on through to downloading the cracked copy. http://www.google.com/search?q="how+to+disable+ads"+software Probably because those applications don't actually give you the option of disabling the ads. They tend to be the 'free' version and if you want to get rid of the ads, you're supposed to actually pay.
Its typical flow is a little like this: 1. Select installer language 2. Welcome page. Action button: "Next" 3. EULA 4. Options (Desktop / Start Menu shortcuts, context menu entry, replace windows defrag, automatically check for updates. All checked by default) 5. FREE! Google Chrome, a faster way to browse the web. Options: Include Google Chrome (checked by default), Make Google Chrome my default browser (checked by default). Action button is now "Install". * 6. Installation progress 7. Finish page. Option: Run defraggler (Checked by default). Action button is now "Finish".
Rather, it is presented in a fashion that can only be described, charitably, as sneaky, and that is bullshit.
So I'm guessing that you wouldn't qualify the above as 'sneaky'. It's pretty darn obvious for anybody who doesn't just try pressing the 'next' button like a brainless monkey.
Please read comment threads in-context, which includes parent comments. In this case, specifically, all you had to do was read the title "Sourceforge is no alternative" and realize that it wasn't within the context of TFA.
That's true, but if you want to avoid the "toolbar" bullshit there's no safe haven.
'bullshit'? I understand that people like to have their software free (mostly as in beer, the speech tends to be an added bonus), but calling the desire for the developer to get a minor kickback from the occasional toolbar install/default homepage switch/etc. 'bullshit' is a bit silly as long as it's optional.
Like it or not, unless Microsoft decides to make their planned app store open to everybody, those sites do provide a reasonable service in notifying users of updates to software that don't have built-in update checking mechanisms.
- is it possible to increase the output of an array by putting parts of it at different horizontal or vertical angles?
In essence, as far as I can figure, yes. The output of a PV cell depends on the irradiance of that cell. The irradiance is strongly linked to the incident angle of the light. This is Lambert's cosine law. In short, the more perpendicular the surface is to the illuminant (the sun), the more energy it will receive.
That's why some solar panels 'track' the sun - so that the panel is perpendicular to the sun all the time. However, those tracking systems are relatively expensive, need upkeep, etc.
But as I asked in another comment (so I won't repeat here), it seems to me there's simpler - and possibly more efficient - solutions for a static set of panels than what this kid has done.
His is more aesthetically pleasing, however.
Now for his next project, he should mount solar panels to sunflowers for eco-friendly tracking with very low upkeep.
So presuming for a moment that most of his gains are in fact from the greater variety in orientation compared to the flat panel that only has the single (or two?) orientation(s), then how might this compare to...
A. PV cells with a fixed lens assembly on top B. Flexible PV cells (they tend to flex in only 1 direction), curved so that the entire arc of the sun is perpendicular to the PV's surface C. a large array of smaller PV cells on a 2-curve surface
The Apollo conspiracy theorists don't even acknowledge the pictures of the stuff the various Apollo crews left on the moon taken by just about everyone with the necessary equipment here on Earth
Correct me if I'm wrong - but wouldn't they have good reason to be skeptical of such claims?
I don't remember any photos of the moon landing site as taken from Earth. In fact, it was my understanding that resolving power of just about any optical system in existence on Earth is inadequate?
That sword is only double-edged if you believe 'the crowd' would be keen on identifying legitimate protesters as much as they are in identifying rioters.
Those who would do so would likely still do so if the police simply put up the same picture on their own website.
This platform is really no different from any other in which individuals are attempted to be identified. Think of the effort to identify the girl who stomped on a kitten, or the guys throwing a dog off of a bridge, etc. It's just on a much larger scale because this time it's rioters - of which there were hundreds.
Something that bothers me, however, is the apparent aim at monetization. Quoth the article:
Q. What other users do you envision for this kind of technology?
A. We do envisage much greater uses for Zavilia. However, as these are currently copyright pending, we cannot disclose any further details.
The thing is, though.. I don't mind shorter games if they don't end up being a large plot crammed into that shorter story, or have a very flat story to begin with.
I.e. I wouldn't want Half-Life 1 to be crammed into a game that's only 1/3rd the original length.
To stick to Half-Life.. if they took its plot and story length as it ended up being, but split it up into 3 titles in a series.. the lab area, battling the military chaps, and the alien world.. that'd work quite well.
Unfortunately, it seems more likely that these shorter games do end up being crammed versions, or that the shorter games are largely uninspiring.
And then at the end of the day, the developers say "well, that was fun but still not very profitable... back to chucking birds/lining up gems/building turrets/feeding the cows/building a gorgeous game that will exist only by its multiplier grace but hey it'll save us the trouble of thinking up storylines as the players will be too busy fragging".
Apple is actually seeking a ban on all of the Galaxy products, including the original tab and the Galaxy S2 smartphone, in The Netherlands. This is not just a ban from Samsung importing them. It's a ban on retailers to sell them (i.e. they need to recall them) and distributors distributing them (to other countries). So that 'good advertising' would only last for as long as they're still allowed to sell it - which might be until mid October if they're unlucky.
In addition Apple demand that in Samsung's recall notice to distributors and retailers, they make note that the product infringes on Apple IP.
Apple isn't scoring any brownie points with these demands, that's for sure. One major online news site's (nu.nl) comments are replete with negative comments toward Apple, even from avid Apple fans, and they're not doing much better over at the #1 tech news site for NL/BE (tweakers.net).
Not that I think it'll impact Apple's bottom line in any way. ha.
I have no doubt that they would extend this to the EU.
I won't go into what constitutes realtime vs interactive, as I can make even the fastest game engine out there 'interactive' as long as I run it on low enough hardware with all the features enabled and running it across multiple HD screens.
But the converse is also exactly my point - raytracing is something that scales very well, you just throw more computational power at it.
I did also mention 'cheats'; in that a game engine doesn't necessarily rely on any one single technology to begin with. We've now got on-hardware tessellation and mesh displacement - but that doesn't stop most games from still using bump maps, normal maps, parallax maps, etc. for the vast majority of surfaces (having to support older hardware factors in to it as well, of course).
automatically block browser add-ons until users approve them, which should put an end to sneaky installs
Exactly how are they going to block that? Anything FireFox has access to, so would an (admin-level) installer.
Unless they're taking a signature from the add-on and some information unique to the user profile and generating a hash/code or that, and keep the hashing algorithm secret somehow?
Raytracing is extremely straight-forward and parallel. The only thing you have to do to make it feasible for use in games is either A. throw more power at it, B. cheat where you can, C. combination of A&B.
Not to mention companies that make dedicated hardware, almost invariably treating raytracing less as a raycasting problem and more as data access problem.
That's what I do when I just want to drive around - though I take it one step further and just let it calculate the shortest route between a few random towns I don't recognize. If it warns me there's unpaved roads - all the better!
It's taken me past more windmills than I knew even existed around here, it's taken me to a little harbor town that looked like it should be a tourist trap but there was barely a soul in sight, it took me past two camels doing the procreation dance (note: I'm in western Europe, and no.. there wasn't a circus in town), it's taken me to back roads that were widened for agricultural traffic but were absolutely dead and going 180km/h was safe and nobody around to say otherwise and cite me, just as it's taken me to back roads that could hardly be called roads and all and required me to crawl along at 5km/h, zigzagging my way through what seemed like the path least likely to get my car (not a 4x4) stuck.
Some of my best 'just driving around' I owe to the GPS. I would rarely have ventured into random roads myself, as many of them here are traps into one-way mazes, or lead into housing areas where that very road is the only entry and exit road, but you'll never find it again once you're in the middle of the area.
More recently, I drove through the California mountain range at night. The GPS (on an Android phone) was a great help in anticipating what the road was going to do - especially in the Arizona/desert side where there's long straight roads that go up and down like a rollercoaster.. at least you think they go straight until you go up a hill and- oh hello, bend.
And in another instance, I very much appreciate GPS coupled with other information systems to get me to my destination as quickly as possible when I'm not traveling for the scenery, and the device can tell me to take a different road if it knows the one I'm on is congested and the alternate will get me there faster.
I agree that it is the point, but while media likes to focus on the drawings of rectangles (which is indeed ludicrous and worth a chuckle until you realize that it could viably be used as an argument in proceedings in Germany), it does stack up from the rectangle almost all the way up to the iPad's actual design.
Samsung not being notified or having an opportunity to defend their case is par for the course for German proceedings. Think of the court cases that can be filed by any third party with no relationship to either the private individual/business who they are suing for, nor with the party being sued.
No, it shows how much I know about *most people* who have one in their home, especially as depicted in the image I linked to. The average person is not a musician or a "rich sound" kind of guy/gal, and those who are would have one in a proper case.
As seen on these videos, this looked exactlty like an iPad!
Except that it doesn't.
Now, don't get me wrong.. I think 90% of the tablets out there look like each other; a large screen with a bezel with rounded corners and rounded-corner icons laid out on a straight grid (I so do wish Microsoft would have continued their hexagonal grid, it was refreshing).
I also think that Apple are silly for complaining about a competing tablet looking rather much like the iPad.
However, I certainly see more of a resemblance between the Galaxy Tab and the iPad than I do between the device in the video and an iPad or the Galaxy Tab.
If Samsung comes up with prior art challenging all, or at least the majority of the specifics, they might stand something of a chance in the Dutch courts - but just pointing at that video and going "look! a tablet from 1994!" isn't going to cut it.
Not that it'll help much - unless they want to tacitly allow a grey market out of The Netherlands, they still have the EU-wide (minus NL) injunction out of Germany to deal with.. precious time, and money, is being lost there and by the time that gets resolved - unless the German / EU courts can fast-track things - the fight will have become moot as they'll have designed an alternative device by that time.
XP is still very much relevant - much to Microsoft's chagrin - regardless of its expiration date. The machine comes with a (OEM) license, presumably, so why waste it?
At the same time, might as well expose them to a Linux distribution that at least has scores of layman support, such as Ubuntu.
No single person would have to 'become' very rich.
If only a million people would put money toward a fund that would make downloading movies and TV shows completely legal - even if its source is without a doubt questionable, for example, matching that of, say, a Netflix subscription, then.... $10/month * 1,000,000 people = $10,000,000/month. $10,000,000/month * 12 months/year = $120,000,000/year. $120,000,000/year * 4 years/term = $480,000,000/term.
I can bet you that the MPAA is not spending half a billion dollars on politicians every term. And Netflix's own numbers who far, far more than 1,000,000 subscribers.
There are, however, three flaws in the above: 1. We're assuming that politicians really are that easily, and quite literally, bought. I.e. if 'we' really were to put that half a billion toward the politicians, that the law would magically change. 2. 'we' are nowhere near organized enough to actually enable such a fund. 3. 'we' are cheap. Oddly enough we'll pay for Netflix because of its ease of use and all that (despite crappy selection - see older comment in my comment history), but once we make the connection that we'd be putting up a fund to make free what is already free (and only has a very slim chance of landing you in trouble), we suddenly don't particularly feel like paying anymore.
Slashdot Mirror
Yep - but sadly commonplace.
Well, yes?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salt_(cryptography)
Perhaps put very simply.. say you find a file full of e-mail addresses followed by md5 codes, e.g.
example@example.com 5eb63bbbe01eeed093cb22bb8f5acdc3
You deduce that they may be hashed login codes, so you run your MD5 hacking tool and find the password to be either "hello world" or "flurblgrabl".
You enter either "hello world" or "flurblgrabl", and you're in.
Now let's say you find instead:
example@example.com 5fc627d07b78d646f67411685c0591e8
You run your MD5 hacking tool and find the password to be a rather cryptic "hBd91qh0u1Zl13-12931" (it isn't, I can't be bothered getting an actual collision). Hey, must be somebody's strong password, right?
So you enter that as the password, and the site politely tells you to piss off.
So what went wrong? The site used a salt. I'll leave it to the clever chaps here to figure out the 'salt' used, but suffice to say that in practical applications the salt will be sufficiently complex to figure out (while ridiculously easy to implement; the simplest implementation simply adds a fixed set of characters to the password string) that finding collisions for the stored MD5 gets you nowhere.
Of course you might run into a problem where you allow the user - either by lack of recognizing the problem or due to a bug in verification code - to enter an empty password. In that case, at the very least with the simple implementations, the MD5 would be an MD5 of the salt itself.
Run an attack against that, take the results (potential salts), now run an attack against all the other MD5 signatures with the found potential salts tacked on until you get matching MD5s.
Now the correct salt has been identified, and the MD5s not just collided against, but completely identified. Now you can use that same information on other sites, and not have to worry about any salts they might use.
But you would still have to get pretty lucky.
Your 'but' is disingenuous considering you can disable the toolbar option in any installer of an application worth the bother. If what you're installing includes it whether you like it or not, I'd question that application developer's ethics.
Nobody's saying they're the only way. In fact, a lot of the installers these days will push Google Chrome on people instead. Chrome gets lauded around these parts (except for people who prefer their FireFox add-ons; myself included), so I guess that one would be 'okay'?
If ads worked as well as you're suggesting, I'd imagine the authors would use them. But I can't remember the last time I worked in an application that pushed ads out into the interface and breathed a sigh of relief that at the very least the author didn't try pushing a toolbar on me. I can easily find threads in which users ask for, and receive, ways to disable those ads, however - from modifying the hosts file right on through to downloading the cracked copy.
http://www.google.com/search?q="how+to+disable+ads"+software
Probably because those applications don't actually give you the option of disabling the ads. They tend to be the 'free' version and if you want to get rid of the ads, you're supposed to actually pay.
[citation needed] ?
The ones I'm used to seeing are like that in Piriform's Defraggler:
http://download.piriform.com/dfsetup206.exe
Its typical flow is a little like this:
1. Select installer language
2. Welcome page. Action button: "Next"
3. EULA
4. Options (Desktop / Start Menu shortcuts, context menu entry, replace windows defrag, automatically check for updates. All checked by default)
5. FREE! Google Chrome, a faster way to browse the web. Options: Include Google Chrome (checked by default), Make Google Chrome my default browser (checked by default). Action button is now "Install". *
6. Installation progress
7. Finish page. Option: Run defraggler (Checked by default). Action button is now "Finish".
* Screenshot of step 5, which is the Google browser inclusion thing:
http://i.imgur.com/qvdhp.png
So I'm guessing that you wouldn't qualify the above as 'sneaky'. It's pretty darn obvious for anybody who doesn't just try pressing the 'next' button like a brainless monkey.
So what's a more sneaky example?
Please read comment threads in-context, which includes parent comments. In this case, specifically, all you had to do was read the title "Sourceforge is no alternative" and realize that it wasn't within the context of TFA.
'bullshit'? I understand that people like to have their software free (mostly as in beer, the speech tends to be an added bonus), but calling the desire for the developer to get a minor kickback from the occasional toolbar install/default homepage switch/etc. 'bullshit' is a bit silly as long as it's optional.
FileHippo also has an update checker:
http://www.filehippo.com/updatechecker/
Like it or not, unless Microsoft decides to make their planned app store open to everybody, those sites do provide a reasonable service in notifying users of updates to software that don't have built-in update checking mechanisms.
In essence, as far as I can figure, yes. The output of a PV cell depends on the irradiance of that cell. The irradiance is strongly linked to the incident angle of the light. This is Lambert's cosine law. In short, the more perpendicular the surface is to the illuminant (the sun), the more energy it will receive.
That's why some solar panels 'track' the sun - so that the panel is perpendicular to the sun all the time. However, those tracking systems are relatively expensive, need upkeep, etc.
But as I asked in another comment (so I won't repeat here), it seems to me there's simpler - and possibly more efficient - solutions for a static set of panels than what this kid has done.
His is more aesthetically pleasing, however.
Now for his next project, he should mount solar panels to sunflowers for eco-friendly tracking with very low upkeep.
Heck, TFA even states 13. That Hoegaarden stuff must have gone to his head.
No more posting drunk, umghhh.
So presuming for a moment that most of his gains are in fact from the greater variety in orientation compared to the flat panel that only has the single (or two?) orientation(s), then how might this compare to...
A. PV cells with a fixed lens assembly on top
B. Flexible PV cells (they tend to flex in only 1 direction), curved so that the entire arc of the sun is perpendicular to the PV's surface
C. a large array of smaller PV cells on a 2-curve surface
Correct me if I'm wrong - but wouldn't they have good reason to be skeptical of such claims?
I don't remember any photos of the moon landing site as taken from Earth. In fact, it was my understanding that resolving power of just about any optical system in existence on Earth is inadequate?
I know photos were taken from an orbiting satellite a few years ago, the LRO. Even in those pictures the landing site is a mere few pixels;
http://www.space.com/6997-photos-reveal-apollo-11-moon-landing-site.html
That sword is only double-edged if you believe 'the crowd' would be keen on identifying legitimate protesters as much as they are in identifying rioters.
Those who would do so would likely still do so if the police simply put up the same picture on their own website.
This platform is really no different from any other in which individuals are attempted to be identified. Think of the effort to identify the girl who stomped on a kitten, or the guys throwing a dog off of a bridge, etc. It's just on a much larger scale because this time it's rioters - of which there were hundreds.
Something that bothers me, however, is the apparent aim at monetization. Quoth the article:
+1
The thing is, though.. I don't mind shorter games if they don't end up being a large plot crammed into that shorter story, or have a very flat story to begin with.
I.e. I wouldn't want Half-Life 1 to be crammed into a game that's only 1/3rd the original length.
To stick to Half-Life.. if they took its plot and story length as it ended up being, but split it up into 3 titles in a series.. the lab area, battling the military chaps, and the alien world.. that'd work quite well.
Unfortunately, it seems more likely that these shorter games do end up being crammed versions, or that the shorter games are largely uninspiring.
And then at the end of the day, the developers say "well, that was fun but still not very profitable... back to chucking birds/lining up gems/building turrets/feeding the cows/building a gorgeous game that will exist only by its multiplier grace but hey it'll save us the trouble of thinking up storylines as the players will be too busy fragging".
cynical? me? nah.
Apple is actually seeking a ban on all of the Galaxy products, including the original tab and the Galaxy S2 smartphone, in The Netherlands.
This is not just a ban from Samsung importing them. It's a ban on retailers to sell them (i.e. they need to recall them) and distributors distributing them (to other countries). So that 'good advertising' would only last for as long as they're still allowed to sell it - which might be until mid October if they're unlucky.
In addition Apple demand that in Samsung's recall notice to distributors and retailers, they make note that the product infringes on Apple IP.
It seems very much a "Let's demand the ridiculous - any toning down by the judge will then fall in our favor" type move, but I'm sure they're actually quite serious.
Source: http://webwereld.nl/nieuws/107630/apple--gehele-galaxy-lijn-moet-uit-de-schappen.html
Apple isn't scoring any brownie points with these demands, that's for sure. One major online news site's (nu.nl) comments are replete with negative comments toward Apple, even from avid Apple fans, and they're not doing much better over at the #1 tech news site for NL/BE (tweakers.net).
Not that I think it'll impact Apple's bottom line in any way. ha.
I have no doubt that they would extend this to the EU.
Actually, not at all surprisingly, Chinese model kit maker Dragon released their vision(1) of the 'stealth helicopter' not too long after the pictures surfaced and others made mock-up images(2);
1) http://www.scale-rotors.com/news-reviews/dragon/stealth-black-hawk-operation-geronimo-4628
2) http://cencio4.wordpress.com/category/stealth-black-hawk/
Though I'm not sure a 1:144 scale model counts as a knock-off per se :)
I won't go into what constitutes realtime vs interactive, as I can make even the fastest game engine out there 'interactive' as long as I run it on low enough hardware with all the features enabled and running it across multiple HD screens.
But the converse is also exactly my point - raytracing is something that scales very well, you just throw more computational power at it.
I did also mention 'cheats'; in that a game engine doesn't necessarily rely on any one single technology to begin with. We've now got on-hardware tessellation and mesh displacement - but that doesn't stop most games from still using bump maps, normal maps, parallax maps, etc. for the vast majority of surfaces (having to support older hardware factors in to it as well, of course).
Exactly how are they going to block that? Anything FireFox has access to, so would an (admin-level) installer.
Unless they're taking a signature from the add-on and some information unique to the user profile and generating a hash/code or that, and keep the hashing algorithm secret somehow?
Developers of dozens of realtime raytracers are lining up to disagree with you.
e.g. VRay RT, Octane, etc.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6QNyI_ZMZjI
Raytracing is extremely straight-forward and parallel. The only thing you have to do to make it feasible for use in games is either A. throw more power at it, B. cheat where you can, C. combination of A&B.
Not to mention companies that make dedicated hardware, almost invariably treating raytracing less as a raycasting problem and more as data access problem.
That's what I do when I just want to drive around - though I take it one step further and just let it calculate the shortest route between a few random towns I don't recognize. If it warns me there's unpaved roads - all the better!
It's taken me past more windmills than I knew even existed around here, it's taken me to a little harbor town that looked like it should be a tourist trap but there was barely a soul in sight, it took me past two camels doing the procreation dance (note: I'm in western Europe, and no.. there wasn't a circus in town), it's taken me to back roads that were widened for agricultural traffic but were absolutely dead and going 180km/h was safe and nobody around to say otherwise and cite me, just as it's taken me to back roads that could hardly be called roads and all and required me to crawl along at 5km/h, zigzagging my way through what seemed like the path least likely to get my car (not a 4x4) stuck.
Some of my best 'just driving around' I owe to the GPS. I would rarely have ventured into random roads myself, as many of them here are traps into one-way mazes, or lead into housing areas where that very road is the only entry and exit road, but you'll never find it again once you're in the middle of the area.
More recently, I drove through the California mountain range at night. The GPS (on an Android phone) was a great help in anticipating what the road was going to do - especially in the Arizona/desert side where there's long straight roads that go up and down like a rollercoaster.. at least you think they go straight until you go up a hill and- oh hello, bend.
And in another instance, I very much appreciate GPS coupled with other information systems to get me to my destination as quickly as possible when I'm not traveling for the scenery, and the device can tell me to take a different road if it knows the one I'm on is congested and the alternate will get me there faster.
I agree that it is the point, but while media likes to focus on the drawings of rectangles (which is indeed ludicrous and worth a chuckle until you realize that it could viably be used as an argument in proceedings in Germany), it does stack up from the rectangle almost all the way up to the iPad's actual design.
Samsung not being notified or having an opportunity to defend their case is par for the course for German proceedings. Think of the court cases that can be filed by any third party with no relationship to either the private individual/business who they are suing for, nor with the party being sued.
No, it shows how much I know about *most people* who have one in their home, especially as depicted in the image I linked to. The average person is not a musician or a "rich sound" kind of guy/gal, and those who are would have one in a proper case.
Amplifier?
Though most people who 'use' those, just 'use' it as a conversation piece.
e.g. http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_6_4/images/manley-stingray-amplifier.jpg
Except that it doesn't.
Now, don't get me wrong..
I think 90% of the tablets out there look like each other; a large screen with a bezel with rounded corners and rounded-corner icons laid out on a straight grid (I so do wish Microsoft would have continued their hexagonal grid, it was refreshing).
I also think that Apple are silly for complaining about a competing tablet looking rather much like the iPad.
However, I certainly see more of a resemblance between the Galaxy Tab and the iPad than I do between the device in the video and an iPad or the Galaxy Tab.
If Samsung comes up with prior art challenging all, or at least the majority of the specifics, they might stand something of a chance in the Dutch courts - but just pointing at that video and going "look! a tablet from 1994!" isn't going to cut it.
Not that it'll help much - unless they want to tacitly allow a grey market out of The Netherlands, they still have the EU-wide (minus NL) injunction out of Germany to deal with.. precious time, and money, is being lost there and by the time that gets resolved - unless the German / EU courts can fast-track things - the fight will have become moot as they'll have designed an alternative device by that time.
XP is still very much relevant - much to Microsoft's chagrin - regardless of its expiration date. The machine comes with a (OEM) license, presumably, so why waste it?
At the same time, might as well expose them to a Linux distribution that at least has scores of layman support, such as Ubuntu.
So why not set up a dual-boot system?
No single person would have to 'become' very rich.
If only a million people would put money toward a fund that would make downloading movies and TV shows completely legal - even if its source is without a doubt questionable, for example, matching that of, say, a Netflix subscription, then....
$10/month * 1,000,000 people = $10,000,000/month.
$10,000,000/month * 12 months/year = $120,000,000/year.
$120,000,000/year * 4 years/term = $480,000,000/term.
I can bet you that the MPAA is not spending half a billion dollars on politicians every term. And Netflix's own numbers who far, far more than 1,000,000 subscribers.
There are, however, three flaws in the above:
1. We're assuming that politicians really are that easily, and quite literally, bought. I.e. if 'we' really were to put that half a billion toward the politicians, that the law would magically change.
2. 'we' are nowhere near organized enough to actually enable such a fund.
3. 'we' are cheap. Oddly enough we'll pay for Netflix because of its ease of use and all that (despite crappy selection - see older comment in my comment history), but once we make the connection that we'd be putting up a fund to make free what is already free (and only has a very slim chance of landing you in trouble), we suddenly don't particularly feel like paying anymore.