So what? The sectors aren't arranged in groupings of any power of 2. The most you could justify is saying 2 sectors is roughly 1000 bytes, and using that as an approximation for size. There's more no logic in grouping 2048 sectors than there is 2000 sectors for a megabyte.
Our computers are binary, and the RAM is addressed that way, but the hard drives aren't. There's nothing about the actual design of the disk and basic reading mechansim that lends istelf to base 2. Perhaps for a 3 platter disk, we should say that 1 KB = 3^6 bytes, or perhaps base it on the number of sectors, or number of cylinders.
It's all arbitrary. 10^3 is an accepted value for "Kilo", and is derived from the greek word for 1000. We have a useable alternative to represent 1024. Use that.
Only if X is about 53. Mine's valid until my 70th birthday anyway. Now you mention it, it does seem a little odd that we don't have to renew it reasonably regularly.
It's actually based on a simply principle that people expect to see typical amounts of red, green and blue in the world. Over time, if the balance in a certain area is offset, the subconcious realises and looks for a pattern in the ionformation.
The Kodak system simply spreads a subliminal message across the length of the film, to convince you that you have enjoyed it. Simple psychology.
I didn't search for "tobeornottobe". I searched for "To Be or not to be". They're different. One is a single word, the other is a search for 6 words in sequence.
Um, yeah. Actually, I don't know what you're talking about. Entering the phrase "to be or not to be" -- with quotes, so as to indicate you want the phrase, not just the collection of words -- yielded the first two pages of results all having that phrase
Not for me. The first page had 2 exceptions (which were probably more useful for people using that string) - One on William shakespeare, but without "To Be Or Not To Be" mentioned in that way, and another about bees with a "2 bee or not too be" pun. Page 2 gave me a page on MCSE's and a veganism promotion site.
And get watched by the government operatives who work there!?
Photocopy the pages requires
I'm sure the publishers will soon be putting chips into photocopiers to prevent people from doing this. Anyoine who attempts will be sent to prison for 5 years.
Get someone *else* to check the book out for you
This has possibilities. I'll have to shoot them immediately aftwerwards though. Plus point of this si I get to keep the book.
If it's recent enough, order/buy the book at a bookstore, use cash.
If I order it, they'll know who I am. They usually ask for contact details. If I buy it anyway, it may still have an RFID tag inside.
Agreed - A fairly pointless test all things considered.
Application launch times
This is even more pointless. Does the load time really depend much on processor power? Surely the CPU spends most of its time waiting for the data to get from the drive to main memory. Load times are affected by most of the components that make it a computer (including graphics card to a small extent), as well as software version, and fragmentation of the disk.
Photoshop manipulation
Now you're being too hard. Many image processing operations take a very long time. If you have to do a lot of operations, even a second can be a long time and a lot of people do work with macs to manipulate very large images. A lot of times. Waiting those 2 seconds can make it seem like a very long time.
And to respond you either have to write to an anonymous PO Box or dial a 1.50/min 0906 number.
Yeah... I don't think these are the most reputable businesses even by telemarketing standards. We need a decent deterrent for these things. Surely they can't be too hard to track down, and I think even the organisations in favour of telemarketing would like to have these guys shut down.
People do not associate pirates with murderers and thieves!
In just how many movies or works of literature have pirates been portrayed negatively? Even the evil ones are portrayed as capable and often honourable leaders. In Pirates of the Carribean - The bad pirate is admired by his crew, and shows cunning and leadership. The heroes are another pirate and the son of a pirate. Most characters who are non-pirates are shown as inept or cowardly.
The same applies to the Dread Pirate Roberts in The Proncess Bride, Blackbeard in Blackbeard's ghost, or Guybrush Threepwood in Secret of Monkey Island. Pirates are heroes and adventurers! Applying the term "pirate" to your enemies has the same negative connotations as calling thieves Robin Hood figures.
Only the author knows, and he can trick the system to make money, then it doesn't take a Ph.D. from UF to figure out what will happen.
People will take notice, and plug the hole. At the moment, I fail to see what advantage a shareware author will have distributing as audio. Sure, he can receive royalties from a central fund, but this assumes people are paying for the music in some way. There's more music in the system.
Since the shareware author is providing a creative work of value to the purchaser, the worst that wil lhappen is he will receive his fair share.
The real point of the question being asked here is how in the world is a dumb computer supposed to interpret this "intent"?
It's not.
Using computers to determine anything arbitrary like this is an excercise in futility. A computer processes information according to the commands applied by humans (programmers and users). Determining the nature of the information should be left to users.
That test illustrates that there is a difference between audio information and image information. They have their own specific codecs that are completely different, and only work on that type of data. In fact, taking arbitary bit sequences as copyrighted works is itself meaningless. You would be arguing that no mp3 is a copy of the CD it was ripped from because only one out of every 256 bytes is the same, which is all you will get from comparing any 2 digital signals.
So, the whole discussion is looking at completely the wrong question. We seem to be asking whether two works are distinguishable by a computer when copyright exists to prevent people from creating works that are distinguishable by a human.
The "intent" of media is exactly what the creator intended it to be. Sure, you may make a derivitive work, and present it as a differnt type of media. The DeCSS gallery is a perfect example of this sort of concept. Derivitive works are covered under traditional copyright law, and I see no reason they should be considered differently - As a creation by a third party, derived from an original. If a programmer or photographer decides to release their work as audio, then great! That gets protected as a musical work, and any specific rules relating to audio works also apply to the audio version of that work.
Re:Open Source isn't for the users
on
Mplayer Revisited
·
· Score: 1
That's true, to an extent.
Being polite and civil is for humans though. Granted, the comment in the FAQ was a joke, but some open source developers do really have that level of disdain for their users. If you don't believe me, look for criticisms of Smoothwall.
Also, it seems that a lot of these developers are producing software purely for recognition though. They like having the fame of being responsible for a well known project. If they don't want to help, they should stop offering help. Someone else will be able to help.
Slashdot Mirror
So what? The sectors aren't arranged in groupings of any power of 2. The most you could justify is saying 2 sectors is roughly 1000 bytes, and using that as an approximation for size. There's more no logic in grouping 2048 sectors than there is 2000 sectors for a megabyte.
Our computers are binary, and the RAM is addressed that way, but the hard drives aren't. There's nothing about the actual design of the disk and basic reading mechansim that lends istelf to base 2. Perhaps for a 3 platter disk, we should say that 1 KB = 3^6 bytes, or perhaps base it on the number of sectors, or number of cylinders.
It's all arbitrary. 10^3 is an accepted value for "Kilo", and is derived from the greek word for 1000. We have a useable alternative to represent 1024. Use that.
Only if X is about 53. Mine's valid until my 70th birthday anyway. Now you mention it, it does seem a little odd that we don't have to renew it reasonably regularly.
Well, I always use windows for ripping CDs.
1. click "start->Run"
2. type "telnet edgar"
3. log in to Linux
4. use "abcde" to rip a CD and convert to Ogg format.
Really must get myself a monitor for my linux box. Could save myself a couple of stages there.
It's actually based on a simply principle that people expect to see typical amounts of red, green and blue in the world. Over time, if the balance in a certain area is offset, the subconcious realises and looks for a pattern in the ionformation.
The Kodak system simply spreads a subliminal message across the length of the film, to convince you that you have enjoyed it. Simple psychology.
I didn't search for "tobeornottobe". I searched for "To Be or not to be". They're different. One is a single word, the other is a search for 6 words in sequence.
Sorry. I meant "Contains the phrase without spaces". I think I need more sleep or more coffee.
For the record - my results:
Link 7
Link 9
Relevent, yes, but neither of them contain the exact phrase. Just modification sof it (#7 contains a pun, #9 contains the phrase without the results)
Um, yeah. Actually, I don't know what you're talking about. Entering the phrase "to be or not to be" -- with quotes, so as to indicate you want the phrase, not just the collection of words -- yielded the first two pages of results all having that phrase
Not for me. The first page had 2 exceptions (which were probably more useful for people using that string) - One on William shakespeare, but without "To Be Or Not To Be" mentioned in that way, and another about bees with a "2 bee or not too be" pun. Page 2 gave me a page on MCSE's and a veganism promotion site.
So don't give them your contact details.
Then they won't order the book.
You're quite right. They're not going to come out and say that in a live discussion though are they?
Yep. That's obviously the real reason. I'd love to see them try to put some positive spin on this.
Read the book at the library
And get watched by the government operatives who work there!?
Photocopy the pages requires
I'm sure the publishers will soon be putting chips into photocopiers to prevent people from doing this. Anyoine who attempts will be sent to prison for 5 years.
Get someone *else* to check the book out for you
This has possibilities. I'll have to shoot them immediately aftwerwards though. Plus point of this si I get to keep the book.
If it's recent enough, order/buy the book at a bookstore, use cash.
If I order it, they'll know who I am. They usually ask for contact details. If I buy it anyway, it may still have an RFID tag inside.
Startup and reboot
Agreed - A fairly pointless test all things considered.
Application launch times
This is even more pointless. Does the load time really depend much on processor power? Surely the CPU spends most of its time waiting for the data to get from the drive to main memory. Load times are affected by most of the components that make it a computer (including graphics card to a small extent), as well as software version, and fragmentation of the disk.
Photoshop manipulation
Now you're being too hard. Many image processing operations take a very long time. If you have to do a lot of operations, even a second can be a long time and a lot of people do work with macs to manipulate very large images. A lot of times. Waiting those 2 seconds can make it seem like a very long time.
And to respond you either have to write to an anonymous PO Box or dial a 1.50/min 0906 number.
Yeah... I don't think these are the most reputable businesses even by telemarketing standards. We need a decent deterrent for these things. Surely they can't be too hard to track down, and I think even the organisations in favour of telemarketing would like to have these guys shut down.
Someopne really needs to ask the obvious question in one of these discussions - Why do they want to talk to people who don't want to be talked to?
Jusy curious - What do they do to harass you?
An analogy with the Nazis draws an emotional parallel. Not a logical one.
Had he read the book? Ford only turned into a single penguin. There were an infinite number of monkeys with a script for Hamlet though.
People do not associate pirates with murderers and thieves!
In just how many movies or works of literature have pirates been portrayed negatively? Even the evil ones are portrayed as capable and often honourable leaders. In Pirates of the Carribean - The bad pirate is admired by his crew, and shows cunning and leadership. The heroes are another pirate and the son of a pirate. Most characters who are non-pirates are shown as inept or cowardly.
The same applies to the Dread Pirate Roberts in The Proncess Bride, Blackbeard in Blackbeard's ghost, or Guybrush Threepwood in Secret of Monkey Island. Pirates are heroes and adventurers! Applying the term "pirate" to your enemies has the same negative connotations as calling thieves Robin Hood figures.
Thanks buddy!
I'm a serial killer, but they had to let me out after 3 months to make room for all you evil pirates.
Only the author knows, and he can trick the system to make money, then it doesn't take a Ph.D. from UF to figure out what will happen.
People will take notice, and plug the hole. At the moment, I fail to see what advantage a shareware author will have distributing as audio. Sure, he can receive royalties from a central fund, but this assumes people are paying for the music in some way. There's more music in the system.
Since the shareware author is providing a creative work of value to the purchaser, the worst that wil lhappen is he will receive his fair share.
The real point of the question being asked here is how in the world is a dumb computer supposed to interpret this "intent"?
It's not.
Using computers to determine anything arbitrary like this is an excercise in futility. A computer processes information according to the commands applied by humans (programmers and users). Determining the nature of the information should be left to users.
That test illustrates that there is a difference between audio information and image information. They have their own specific codecs that are completely different, and only work on that type of data. In fact, taking arbitary bit sequences as copyrighted works is itself meaningless. You would be arguing that no mp3 is a copy of the CD it was ripped from because only one out of every 256 bytes is the same, which is all you will get from comparing any 2 digital signals.
So, the whole discussion is looking at completely the wrong question. We seem to be asking whether two works are distinguishable by a computer when copyright exists to prevent people from creating works that are distinguishable by a human.
The "intent" of media is exactly what the creator intended it to be. Sure, you may make a derivitive work, and present it as a differnt type of media. The DeCSS gallery is a perfect example of this sort of concept. Derivitive works are covered under traditional copyright law, and I see no reason they should be considered differently - As a creation by a third party, derived from an original. If a programmer or photographer decides to release their work as audio, then great! That gets protected as a musical work, and any specific rules relating to audio works also apply to the audio version of that work.
That's true, to an extent.
Being polite and civil is for humans though. Granted, the comment in the FAQ was a joke, but some open source developers do really have that level of disdain for their users. If you don't believe me, look for criticisms of Smoothwall.
Also, it seems that a lot of these developers are producing software purely for recognition though. They like having the fame of being responsible for a well known project. If they don't want to help, they should stop offering help. Someone else will be able to help.