That depends on whether you are talking consumer or professional video.
If your target is professional video, the customer will scream loudly if even a single frame is dropped (and they will check), or if any fields are reversed, etc.
Though for these applications, you really need guaranteed real-time performance anyway, for which a RTOS or (possibly) Real-Time Linux is more appropriate. It could also possibly be done with a kernel thread...
Note that, even when the copyright expires, the authors are not required to "release their works into the public domain". The expiration just allows others to distribute any copies that they might have.
A minor nit, and mostly theoretical, since I don't expect that we're ever going to see a copyright expire again in our lifetimes...
You obviously haven't watched the Olympics in HD. Before anyone comments on HD quality or program availability, they really should drag themselves over to a good electronics store to see what is available (preferably the Olympics).
The best benefit to the HD Olympics that I hadn't anticipated is that they use different announcers! No Bob Costas rambling on and on just so that he can hear his own voice. And no "human interest" stories -- just pure sports. (And, it seems to me, there are fewer ads.)
However, the downside is that the coverage is delayed 24 hours, and they only have so many HD cameras, so some sports (downhill skiing, for example, which takes an ungodly number of cameras to show) aren't covered at all.
First off please get a better link on the Laserdisc. as it is misleading. The ANALOG signal is converted to DIGITAL for the disc and then back to ANALOG for playback..
You totally don't understand how laserdiscs are encoded, so it's difficult to take any of your other arguments seriously.
Laserdiscs are encoded as PWM (pulse width modulation), which is a distinctly analog process.
The original poster's link: How do LDs Look Like (sic) is the best I've seen. Note how the pits are of varying length -- directly relating to the voltage at the point. If the pit's length should change at all, even minutely, the output voltage will also change; that is the definition of an analog process!
Add to this the fact that the laserdisc video is encoded as composite. The conversion from the original Y/C component to composite video is a lossy conversion -- a high-quality 3D comb filter can do a somewhat decent job of converting back, but it has to make assumptions about the original video (and has to sample the signal over time to form a basis in order to make its prediction).
I have over 150 laserdiscs, and it was by far the best format for the time, but a well-encoded anamorphic DVD will blow laserdisc away for video quality...
It is not that we have the right to timeshift recordings, it is just legal for us to do so if we can figure out to do so (though the current reasoning as per the DMCA is that it is only legal if it isn't digital and there is absolutely no attempt by the originator to control access).
If the powers-that-be can figure out how to keep us from doing recording (as they have so far been able to do so far with non-broadcast HDTV), they are perfectly within their rights to keep us from timeshifting/recording/etc.
Please don't waste our time commenting about the GPL until you understand it...
The GPL places absolutely no limits on use of the software. It only controls redistribution (which is a right that you definitely don't have with commercial software anyway). So comparing it to an "End User Licensing Agreement" makes no sense.
You know, even though someone posts this exact same joke everytime the Business Software Alliance comes up, the joke never gets old. I just can't stop laughing...
Not necessarily. The copyright holder (in this case, FSF) can choose to license the software under any license, including a "no copy, no reverse engineer, all your firstborn are belong to us" type EULA.
Are you even slightly suggesting that the FSF would ever do this? If not, then why mention it? This runs contrary to everything that the FSF stands for.
In addition, the original quote was about Cygnus, who would possibly do such a thing. Unfortunately for them, GCC is GPLed, and they don't own the copyright...
I see a purpose for both licenses. I think that something that is expected to be extended, like gcc, is much better off with the GPL. Libraries and such I would prefer to be BSD.
On the other hand, how much good has it done us (the community) for the Linux kernel to be under the GPL versus BSD, when anything "interesting" can just be built as a kernel module? Take Tivo as an example.
And in terms of "freeness", consider that BSD code may be used in a GPL program, with the results still under the GPL. The reverse is definitely not true!
I would guess, from my experience, 95% of people with CS degrees can't write a sort routine.
I'm not a CS grad [rather, Maths], but I would not consider this a problem. What is a problem is the 95% of CS grads who don't know how to find the sort routine in the standard libraries of the language they are using.
Bullsh*t. While you might not expect a CS student to be able to come up with a quicksort all by themselves, they certainly should be able to successfully whip up some sort of sorting algorithm. Computer science should (and is) a great deal more than just "pasting functions together"...
Are you joking? When I screen 500 applicants for a job the one that lists all dead languages is not the one to get the job. I don't have the time for someone to learn the specifics of each language on my dime. I absolutely want them coming out of university with the language I need.
If you're hiring graduates who can't quickly learn $LANGUAGE_OF_THE_MONTH to the same level of detail as any other language that they learned in college, you aren't selecting the right people.
I don't at all believe that most any student would graduate with a "productive" knowledge of C++, for example, based solely on their educational experiences. There just isn't enough depth to class projects. Additional work experience (internships, etc.) could give them this experience...
However, an exception student with only a good grasp of Pascal (though I would hope they would have experience in other types of languages, such as Lisp, etc.), including pointer operations and data structures, could transfer this knowledge to any similar language with little difficulty.
I shudder when I think of a student having to muddle through the confusions of C++ when they are just learning to program. Talk about losing sight of the forest for the trees...
Do any of the distributions not place everything into/usr (i.e. in some discrete alternatve location, such as/opt)? What about not requiring root access in order to install a package that doesn't place files in "system areas"?
I find it interesting that people often complain about "DLL hell", yet we still live with unrelocatable applications in Linux. I'm also surprised that there haven't been any exploits involving tainted RPM files. By default, when an RPM is installed, it is allowed to execute pretty much any code that it wants!
I've taken to creating many of my RPMs from scratch; they can almost always be built as a non-root user, and can usually be installed as a non-root user (using an alternate RPM database), but the management of both (root and non-root) systems is a bit difficult, and it would be easier if the distribution wouldn't put thousands of files into/usr. Gnome and KDE really have no business being there...
It means that the EULA is just meaningless fiction, and not a contract that you bound yourself to.
Almost all EULAs are like that.
Even GPL.
Repeat after me:
The GPL is not an EULA.
Say it about a hundred times, then come back and post again.
To be more specific (even though it is mentioned earlier in this thread, apparently people don't read the thread before they post), the GPL affects redistribution rights; it has nothing to say about the way in which you use the software!
I've never had a custom-designed system based on FreeBSD (or Linux) but I would think that it would drive me insane, knowing that it was based on FreeBSD, but unable to use any of the flexibility FreeBSD offers.
Note that this is no different with Linux-based systems.
The TiVo is a good example. Version 2.5 of the software signs all of the files in / and/etc. If the signatures don't match, the files are replaced with their original versions. If this doesn't succeed, the system reboots (rinse and repeat). Even though their kernel modifications are availble, it doesn't do you a bit of good to allow you access to the TiVo that you bought and paid for. (Note that the widely-known hard drive modifications didn't require any access to the source; however, the TiVoNet modification, which doesn't work on DirecTiVos, did benefit from this information.)
There are a number of Linux-based systems for which this is true. I personally think that it's a pretty big deficiency of the GPL that it doesn't require access to be provided to allow the owner modify the system on which the source is used. Ironic, since the GPL was supposedly created because Richard Stallman was unable to modify the operation of a system that he controlled...
I had this very same argument with a friend of mine, and then I later thought more about it:
Why should we be allowed to arbitrarily seize intellectual property?
Few would suggest that the Sears Tower should now be in the public domain, just because it has been owned for over fifty years.
The difference, in my opinion, is that the Sears Tower is taxed, and so that owner must weigh the ongoing taxes against the value of the property. This is why most (all?) of the castles in Europe are now public -- they can't afford to pay the taxes on them otherwise.
On the other hand, companies such as Disney can sit on their portfolio of copyrighted works, enjoying the protection of the government, without ever giving anything back (remember that the original concept of patents and copyrights was supposed to be a trade -- protection for eventual public domain; the second half of the trade has been lost).
Slashdot Mirror
That depends on whether you are talking consumer or professional video.
If your target is professional video, the customer will scream loudly if even a single frame is dropped (and they will check), or if any fields are reversed, etc.
Though for these applications, you really need guaranteed real-time performance anyway, for which a RTOS or (possibly) Real-Time Linux is more appropriate. It could also possibly be done with a kernel thread...
The one I've always heard is:
DO NOT LOOK INTO LASER WITH REMAINING EYE
Note that, even when the copyright expires, the authors are not required to "release their works into the public domain". The expiration just allows others to distribute any copies that they might have.
A minor nit, and mostly theoretical, since I don't expect that we're ever going to see a copyright expire again in our lifetimes...
You obviously haven't watched the Olympics in HD. Before anyone comments on HD quality or program availability, they really should drag themselves over to a good electronics store to see what is available (preferably the Olympics).
The best benefit to the HD Olympics that I hadn't anticipated is that they use different announcers! No Bob Costas rambling on and on just so that he can hear his own voice. And no "human interest" stories -- just pure sports. (And, it seems to me, there are fewer ads.)
However, the downside is that the coverage is delayed 24 hours, and they only have so many HD cameras, so some sports (downhill skiing, for example, which takes an ungodly number of cameras to show) aren't covered at all.
The picture quality is jaw-dropping however!
You totally don't understand how laserdiscs are encoded, so it's difficult to take any of your other arguments seriously.
Laserdiscs are encoded as PWM (pulse width modulation), which is a distinctly analog process.
The original poster's link: How do LDs Look Like (sic) is the best I've seen. Note how the pits are of varying length -- directly relating to the voltage at the point. If the pit's length should change at all, even minutely, the output voltage will also change; that is the definition of an analog process!
Add to this the fact that the laserdisc video is encoded as composite. The conversion from the original Y/C component to composite video is a lossy conversion -- a high-quality 3D comb filter can do a somewhat decent job of converting back, but it has to make assumptions about the original video (and has to sample the signal over time to form a basis in order to make its prediction).
I have over 150 laserdiscs, and it was by far the best format for the time, but a well-encoded anamorphic DVD will blow laserdisc away for video quality...
Just a minor nit...
It is not that we have the right to timeshift recordings, it is just legal for us to do so if we can figure out to do so (though the current reasoning as per the DMCA is that it is only legal if it isn't digital and there is absolutely no attempt by the originator to control access).
If the powers-that-be can figure out how to keep us from doing recording (as they have so far been able to do so far with non-broadcast HDTV), they are perfectly within their rights to keep us from timeshifting/recording/etc.
However, I hope that your coding kills are better than the logic skills that you've shown above:
Quite a leap of logic you're making there...
Please don't waste our time commenting about the GPL until you understand it...
The GPL places absolutely no limits on use of the software. It only controls redistribution (which is a right that you definitely don't have with commercial software anyway). So comparing it to an "End User Licensing Agreement" makes no sense.
You know, even though someone posts this exact same joke everytime the Business Software Alliance comes up, the joke never gets old. I just can't stop laughing...
Are you even slightly suggesting that the FSF would ever do this? If not, then why mention it? This runs contrary to everything that the FSF stands for.
In addition, the original quote was about Cygnus, who would possibly do such a thing. Unfortunately for them, GCC is GPLed, and they don't own the copyright...
I see a purpose for both licenses. I think that something that is expected to be extended, like gcc, is much better off with the GPL. Libraries and such I would prefer to be BSD.
On the other hand, how much good has it done us (the community) for the Linux kernel to be under the GPL versus BSD, when anything "interesting" can just be built as a kernel module? Take Tivo as an example.
And in terms of "freeness", consider that BSD code may be used in a GPL program, with the results still under the GPL. The reverse is definitely not true!
I think that we need a moderating category for "No sense of humor"...
Bullsh*t. While you might not expect a CS student to be able to come up with a quicksort all by themselves, they certainly should be able to successfully whip up some sort of sorting algorithm. Computer science should (and is) a great deal more than just "pasting functions together"...
If you're hiring graduates who can't quickly learn $LANGUAGE_OF_THE_MONTH to the same level of detail as any other language that they learned in college, you aren't selecting the right people.
I don't at all believe that most any student would graduate with a "productive" knowledge of C++, for example, based solely on their educational experiences. There just isn't enough depth to class projects. Additional work experience (internships, etc.) could give them this experience...
However, an exception student with only a good grasp of Pascal (though I would hope they would have experience in other types of languages, such as Lisp, etc.), including pointer operations and data structures, could transfer this knowledge to any similar language with little difficulty.
I shudder when I think of a student having to muddle through the confusions of C++ when they are just learning to program. Talk about losing sight of the forest for the trees...
"Microsoft was found Guilty of being a Monopoly."
Geez, I wish people would get this straight.
There is nothing illegal about having a monopoly; the problem is when monopoly is abused. This is something that Microsoft did repeatedly.
Those of you who are saying "Let the free market decide". Please note that there was no free market in this case!
I find it interesting that people often complain about "DLL hell", yet we still live with unrelocatable applications in Linux. I'm also surprised that there haven't been any exploits involving tainted RPM files. By default, when an RPM is installed, it is allowed to execute pretty much any code that it wants!
I've taken to creating many of my RPMs from scratch; they can almost always be built as a non-root user, and can usually be installed as a non-root user (using an alternate RPM database), but the management of both (root and non-root) systems is a bit difficult, and it would be easier if the distribution wouldn't put thousands of files into /usr. Gnome and KDE really have no business being there...
Almost all EULAs are like that.
Even GPL.
Repeat after me:
The GPL is not an EULA.
Say it about a hundred times, then come back and post again.
To be more specific (even though it is mentioned earlier in this thread, apparently people don't read the thread before they post), the GPL affects redistribution rights; it has nothing to say about the way in which you use the software!
I've never had a custom-designed system based on FreeBSD (or Linux) but I would think that it would drive me insane, knowing that it was based on FreeBSD, but unable to use any of the flexibility FreeBSD offers.
/etc. If the signatures don't match, the files are replaced with their original versions. If this doesn't succeed, the system reboots (rinse and repeat). Even though their kernel modifications are availble, it doesn't do you a bit of good to allow you access to the TiVo that you bought and paid for. (Note that the widely-known hard drive modifications didn't require any access to the source; however, the TiVoNet modification, which doesn't work on DirecTiVos, did benefit from this information.)
Note that this is no different with Linux-based systems.
The TiVo is a good example. Version 2.5 of the software signs all of the files in / and
There are a number of Linux-based systems for which this is true. I personally think that it's a pretty big deficiency of the GPL that it doesn't require access to be provided to allow the owner modify the system on which the source is used. Ironic, since the GPL was supposedly created because Richard Stallman was unable to modify the operation of a system that he controlled...
Why should we be allowed to arbitrarily seize intellectual property?
Few would suggest that the Sears Tower should now be in the public domain, just because it has been owned for over fifty years.
The difference, in my opinion, is that the Sears Tower is taxed, and so that owner must weigh the ongoing taxes against the value of the property. This is why most (all?) of the castles in Europe are now public -- they can't afford to pay the taxes on them otherwise.
On the other hand, companies such as Disney can sit on their portfolio of copyrighted works, enjoying the protection of the government, without ever giving anything back (remember that the original concept of patents and copyrights was supposed to be a trade -- protection for eventual public domain; the second half of the trade has been lost).
The solution seems simple! :-)