Yes, I said that very thing, several times. But the fact that I and the courts think you do have that right does not mean that it is enumerated in the Constitution. I have the right to mow my lawn on Saturday morning also, but that right is not enumerated in the Constitution.
It's this simple: I don't want to support any player or company that supports only proprietary formats. Supporting Real codecs means limiting my options. I want to see content produced in standards based "open" codecs like MPEG 4, Motion JPEG,AAC, MP3, etc. When I click on a video file from the web I don't want to have to DL some specialized player, I want the player I want to launch. When a web site requires a Real player I find another source for the video, or write the operators and ask them for another format.
Also.. you don't really understand QT if you don't mention what codec it was using. QT supports about 12 video codecs out of the box, from Apple-only ones like "Animation" to standards like "Sorenson" and "MPEG 4". Quicktime is a file and syncronization format, not a codec. It's a media wrapper.
Enumerated meand that the thing is specifically mentioned or "spelled out". Your right to choose a religion or none is an enumerated right. You right to a jury trial is an enumerated right. The right for black people to vote is an enumerated right. Privacy is alluded to in the Constitution, and specified in case law, as others have mentioned, but "privacy" is not and enumerated right.
I do think that privacy is a right, and I am not in any way arguing against it. In fact, I would love to see a specific amendment that defines the parameters of and guarantees "privacy" and what a government must do to pierce that right.
Yes, the 9th and 10th are quite symbiotic. They both explain that the people are granted rights inherently, and the government is not the source of rights. In fact, every time a governmnet in the US passes a law, it restricts your freedom to exercise your rights. There is no law that can be passes that would give you more rights than you inherently have under the Constitution.
RE: Nitpick... The Bill of Rights are amendments to the Constitution and part of it at the same time. The framers added them later as a separately ratified document. The framers referred to the first 10 amendments as a distinct entity, and I choose to do so. My reason is this: The Constitution proper deals with the foundation of the government, who whill do what, for how long and why. The Bill of Rights deals with limiting the scope of the Federal Government's powers.
But yes, any amendment to the Constitution becomes part of the Constitution, just as any accessory added to a car becomes part of the car. You may still refer to either as a separate entity though.
But you miss the larger point. Just because a person A has a right, that does not eliminate person B's right to violate the right of right A. They are two mutually existing rights, who's rights prevail is usually decided by a court.
As to privacy, you'll find that case law also stricly restricts your privacy rights to your person and private property. You have no resonable expectation of privacy anywhere except in your own home with the curtains closed. Once in a public space (even if it is private property) all bets are off. But the fact remains as I stated in my original post that neither the Constitution nor the Bill of Rights enumerates "provacy". Case law can be changed at the whim of some later court or legislation. To change the Constitution is slightly more involved.
We need to take a moment to break apart "government" here.
Apparently some small portion of our elected officials put this clause in the legislation. From the article I read much of the Congress seems to have been ignorant of the presence and/or ramifications of the clause. So I don't think we can put a blanket condemnation on the Legislative branch.
The Executive branch seems to have been the driving force behind the inclusion of this clause, and signed the bill with full knowledge and awareness of its presence and effect.
The Judicial branch has not yet weighed in on the legislation, and indeed they can't until suit is brought againt it. My thought is that this suit need to be brought somewhere in California as the 9th circuit almost always rules agains new government powers and the case would likely go to the US Supreme Court for final determination.
So it looks to me like most of the government has not attempted any redefinition, and that this will be remedied quickly via legislative repeal or via court order.
I will be writing to my Congress critters to politely vent my dissapointment over this law. I strongly suggest everyone else do so also. DON'T EMAIL, write an actual letter on actual paper (yes you can use a printer).
But making something illegal does not take away your right to do the something. The 10th specifically states that a right must be reserved by the government for a citizen to not have it any more. Making an act illegal does not reserve the right of performing that act for the government.
Well, that's a very arguable topic. Do you REALLY have the right to "privacy". Certainly no such right is enumerated in the Constitution or Bill of Rights.
What right you are granted in the fourth amendment is The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures...
Now... some in the government seem to think it is reasonable that if you are even thought casually to be a terrorist, that ANY search of your, your property or information is reasonable. This is called the security over freedom camp.
There are those that argue that the right to privacy is one of the non enumerated rights you hold via the 10th amendment The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. If I may paraphrase that to my understanding: "Unless the Federal Government by way of the Constitution or the States via laws or State Constitution retain a right exclusively from the people, the people maintain the right." This argument is that people hold all rights until a state law or Constitutional amendment take the right away, thus unless the government specifically takes away your privacy, then you have it. The slippery slope here is that the government does not retain the right to torture small children, thus you by default have that right via the 10th amendment. I personally agree with this last point and point out that the state does have the right to make such acts illegal and arest, try and punish you for such acts, but this does not diminish your right to commit the acts.
I guess the question then is how specific does the "method" get? I'm sure that EchoStart is not using the same code that TiVo is, EchoStar in fact is using much open source stuff and have released their code changes to the world.
If "method" is simply using a hard disk to store a/v info, then everyone is screwed, if it means the actual proceedure and mechanisms of formats, signal paths, etc then again, we've got another ball game.
Isn't that the way things usually go? You can't (for example) patent cloning, you can only patent a specific method of cloning. If someone else comes up with a similar but different method they are clear to use it.
...Then you should be aware that you have a very extreme view of design durability. Would you be willing to pay the extra money to have the walls of your house made from three feet of structural concrete, with perfect valve seals for every window and door? If my house were going to be orbiting 300+ miles above the planet in negligible atmosphere, with millions of pieces of debris around it (some tracked, some not), each piece travelling at thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, of miles per hour, with no way or instantly isolating broken compartments, no way ot instant escape, and no way for rescue/re-supply on anything shorter than a one week timetable, then yes; I would opt for a much smaller, much sturdier, much more monitorable contruction scheme with girder frames, thick walls, etc. While plate on frame contruction could be slower and more expensive to build, I think it is more reliable and stronger than the docked aluminum can approach they are using now.
As for the whole pressurization dezign... simply flow rate sensors would keep track of the amount og gas stored in reserves, you could in fact use a system of three independent and monitorable sensors as I stated and it would be just as functional and problems would be more quickly and reliably isolated.
Dish may have any number of legal arguments, the first is that the implimentation/idea is obvious and TiVo should not have been issued the patent (and the patent would be overturned/revoked).
On a more direct front, the implimentations are different. TiVo digitizes and stores video signals. Dish PVRs don't technically time-shift video, they time-shift satellite broadcasts which are digital streams. Those streams may later be decoded in to audio and video.
A minor distinction, but it might be enough to elude a ruling against Dish in court.
I think the Go Video dual VHS decks would have to qualify as prior art. You could record to one tape while playing from the other. There are many other combinations possible with multiple external video sources/tuners. I don't recall the exact capabilites of them, but I know GO had dual deck VCRs in the mid 80s, certainly that would qualify as prior art against the TiVo patent.
I'm somewhat surprised that the xServe's fronstide bus wasn't architected to be 64bit in each direction instead of 32bit like the PowerMac. That way the G5s would have 8GB/s throughput in each direction (total of 16GB/s).
Do the current G5s just not support a 64bit data bus at the moment? I haven't looked at IBM's specs for the thing.
From what I read to date they suspect a leak, they haven't isolate the problem to a leak yet.
The report so far is, as you stated, that an alarm was raised because the sensors have shown a steady decrease in cabin pressure over a few days. Apparently the sensors that regulate the pressure don't see the pressure decrease, or the pressure would not be decreasing. (ie: if the regulators detected low pressure, they would compensate with more gas and the pressure would remain stable). If the monitoring sensors see a decrease and the regulating sensors don't, then there's a malfunction. Whether that malfunction is in the regulator or monitoring sensors must be determined. Either way ISS is not working well and someone needs to figure out what is wrong and why.
Of course, a pressure leak is quite plausible given the hodge-podge nature of assembly and the relatively thin skin of the ISS. I personally don't consider tying a few tin cans together to be a space station. When they get around to welding girders and fastening skins like a standard building, then we'll talk about having a space station (IMO).
...Macworld Expo in San Francisco, a $250 MP3 player with a 4GB hard drive that comes in several colors... This statement in the main article is wrong. The iPod mini is not hard drive based, it is flash based.
Re:I Knew Rocket Scientist, and You're No...
on
ISS May Have A Leak
·
· Score: 1
What I meant is that the actual problem should be alerted. They've got a reported lowering of pressure. If its a leak, they should automatically know that, not have to guess and cross-check to see if it really is, or its a sensore error.
Or have they looked at the amount of gas in the storage tanks? Seriously, if there were a leak, you'd think they'd notice the extra gas usage. With all the sensors and remote monitoring I'd think this would be an automated alert.
NASA's monitoring, saftey and planning people may need to be sat down and slapped really soon. There's just WAY too many "simple" things they keep missing. Or perhaps this is another issue that's been lost in a PowerPoint presentaion?
With only 2GB, you will be constantly swapping songs on and off this thing, perhaps completely replacing the contents. You might be waiting 8+ minutes every day. Sure... you get 7 minutes for a single large file, but to write many smaller files your're in the 8-10 minute time frame.
For comparison, the first generation iPod's 5GB drive has a transfer rate of about 22MB/s on an ATA/66 bus, or about 5 minutes to fill the thing. The newer drives are even faster and use ATA/100 interfaces.
I guess we'll know as early as a few hours if a mini is released. If so, wait a few days and someone will have made a web page with photographs of the disassembled unit, then we'll know what's in it.
But the vertically stacked list effectively takes the same amount of space away from the main page. Thumbnail vs list only affects the horizontal space taken up by the items. I don't see any way to do tabs in the "standard" way which only removes about 12 pixels from the web page display area.
The thumbnails are a nice idea, but really I'd just as soon use Expose to and multiple windows to do the same thing with Safari or iCab(my main browser do the EXCELLENT wildcard based configuration). If the thumbnails could be put in a separate window that could be called up with a single key/button click, that would be nice.
"harsher laws" will have just about no effect on the amount of spam. If you make unsolicited email illegal (which won't happen since it hasn't happened with the postal mail), then the bulk emailers will simply move off-shore, perhaps to Canada or Mexico, where sending spam is not illegal. We will have as much chance of convicting forgeign spammers as we would of a foreigner threatening to kill the president while in their own country. Can't happen. Despite the views of our current president, US law != international law.
By "opt in", does your company mean "If you want to do business with us, you must give use you email address and agree to recieve our junk mail?" Because that's not "opt-in". Opt-in email should be separate and distinct from any business relationship you have with a customer.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, I said that very thing, several times. But the fact that I and the courts think you do have that right does not mean that it is enumerated in the Constitution.
I have the right to mow my lawn on Saturday morning also, but that right is not enumerated in the Constitution.
Um... WMP takes up a lot more than 6MB, you just can't see it directly because it's all in the core system.
It's this simple: I don't want to support any player or company that supports only proprietary formats. Supporting Real codecs means limiting my options.
I want to see content produced in standards based "open" codecs like MPEG 4, Motion JPEG,AAC, MP3, etc. When I click on a video file from the web I don't want to have to DL some specialized player, I want the player I want to launch.
When a web site requires a Real player I find another source for the video, or write the operators and ask them for another format.
Also.. you don't really understand QT if you don't mention what codec it was using. QT supports about 12 video codecs out of the box, from Apple-only ones like "Animation" to standards like "Sorenson" and "MPEG 4". Quicktime is a file and syncronization format, not a codec. It's a media wrapper.
Enumerated meand that the thing is specifically mentioned or "spelled out". Your right to choose a religion or none is an enumerated right. You right to a jury trial is an enumerated right. The right for black people to vote is an enumerated right.
Privacy is alluded to in the Constitution, and specified in case law, as others have mentioned, but "privacy" is not and enumerated right.
I do think that privacy is a right, and I am not in any way arguing against it. In fact, I would love to see a specific amendment that defines the parameters of and guarantees "privacy" and what a government must do to pierce that right.
Yes, the 9th and 10th are quite symbiotic. They both explain that the people are granted rights inherently, and the government is not the source of rights. In fact, every time a governmnet in the US passes a law, it restricts your freedom to exercise your rights. There is no law that can be passes that would give you more rights than you inherently have under the Constitution.
RE: Nitpick... The Bill of Rights are amendments to the Constitution and part of it at the same time. The framers added them later as a separately ratified document. The framers referred to the first 10 amendments as a distinct entity, and I choose to do so. My reason is this: The Constitution proper deals with the foundation of the government, who whill do what, for how long and why. The Bill of Rights deals with limiting the scope of the Federal Government's powers.
But yes, any amendment to the Constitution becomes part of the Constitution, just as any accessory added to a car becomes part of the car. You may still refer to either as a separate entity though.
But you miss the larger point. Just because a person A has a right, that does not eliminate person B's right to violate the right of right A.
They are two mutually existing rights, who's rights prevail is usually decided by a court.
As to privacy, you'll find that case law also stricly restricts your privacy rights to your person and private property. You have no resonable expectation of privacy anywhere except in your own home with the curtains closed. Once in a public space (even if it is private property) all bets are off.
But the fact remains as I stated in my original post that neither the Constitution nor the Bill of Rights enumerates "provacy". Case law can be changed at the whim of some later court or legislation. To change the Constitution is slightly more involved.
We need to take a moment to break apart "government" here.
Apparently some small portion of our elected officials put this clause in the legislation. From the article I read much of the Congress seems to have been ignorant of the presence and/or ramifications of the clause. So I don't think we can put a blanket condemnation on the Legislative branch.
The Executive branch seems to have been the driving force behind the inclusion of this clause, and signed the bill with full knowledge and awareness of its presence and effect.
The Judicial branch has not yet weighed in on the legislation, and indeed they can't until suit is brought againt it. My thought is that this suit need to be brought somewhere in California as the 9th circuit almost always rules agains new government powers and the case would likely go to the US Supreme Court for final determination.
So it looks to me like most of the government has not attempted any redefinition, and that this will be remedied quickly via legislative repeal or via court order.
I will be writing to my Congress critters to politely vent my dissapointment over this law. I strongly suggest everyone else do so also. DON'T EMAIL, write an actual letter on actual paper (yes you can use a printer).
But making something illegal does not take away your right to do the something. The 10th specifically states that a right must be reserved by the government for a citizen to not have it any more.
Making an act illegal does not reserve the right of performing that act for the government.
Well, that's a very arguable topic. Do you REALLY have the right to "privacy". Certainly no such right is enumerated in the Constitution or Bill of Rights.
What right you are granted in the fourth amendment is The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures...
Now... some in the government seem to think it is reasonable that if you are even thought casually to be a terrorist, that ANY search of your, your property or information is reasonable. This is called the security over freedom camp.
There are those that argue that the right to privacy is one of the non enumerated rights you hold via the 10th amendment The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. If I may paraphrase that to my understanding:
"Unless the Federal Government by way of the Constitution or the States via laws or State Constitution retain a right exclusively from the people, the people maintain the right."
This argument is that people hold all rights until a state law or Constitutional amendment take the right away, thus unless the government specifically takes away your privacy, then you have it.
The slippery slope here is that the government does not retain the right to torture small children, thus you by default have that right via the 10th amendment. I personally agree with this last point and point out that the state does have the right to make such acts illegal and arest, try and punish you for such acts, but this does not diminish your right to commit the acts.
To infinity band beyond!
Sorry, wrong film.
I guess the question then is how specific does the "method" get? I'm sure that EchoStart is not using the same code that TiVo is, EchoStar in fact is using much open source stuff and have released their code changes to the world.
If "method" is simply using a hard disk to store a/v info, then everyone is screwed, if it means the actual proceedure and mechanisms of formats, signal paths, etc then again, we've got another ball game.
Isn't that the way things usually go? You can't (for example) patent cloning, you can only patent a specific method of cloning. If someone else comes up with a similar but different method they are clear to use it.
...Then you should be aware that you have a very extreme view of design durability. Would you be willing to pay the extra money to have the walls of your house made from three feet of structural concrete, with perfect valve seals for every window and door?
If my house were going to be orbiting 300+ miles above the planet in negligible atmosphere, with millions of pieces of debris around it (some tracked, some not), each piece travelling at thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, of miles per hour, with no way or instantly isolating broken compartments, no way ot instant escape, and no way for rescue/re-supply on anything shorter than a one week timetable, then yes; I would opt for a much smaller, much sturdier, much more monitorable contruction scheme with girder frames, thick walls, etc.
While plate on frame contruction could be slower and more expensive to build, I think it is more reliable and stronger than the docked aluminum can approach they are using now.
As for the whole pressurization dezign... simply flow rate sensors would keep track of the amount og gas stored in reserves, you could in fact use a system of three independent and monitorable sensors as I stated and it would be just as functional and problems would be more quickly and reliably isolated.
Dish may have any number of legal arguments, the first is that the implimentation/idea is obvious and TiVo should not have been issued the patent (and the patent would be overturned/revoked).
On a more direct front, the implimentations are different. TiVo digitizes and stores video signals. Dish PVRs don't technically time-shift video, they time-shift satellite broadcasts which are digital streams. Those streams may later be decoded in to audio and video.
A minor distinction, but it might be enough to elude a ruling against Dish in court.
I think the Go Video dual VHS decks would have to qualify as prior art. You could record to one tape while playing from the other.
There are many other combinations possible with multiple external video sources/tuners.
I don't recall the exact capabilites of them, but I know GO had dual deck VCRs in the mid 80s, certainly that would qualify as prior art against the TiVo patent.
I'm somewhat surprised that the xServe's fronstide bus wasn't architected to be 64bit in each direction instead of 32bit like the PowerMac. That way the G5s would have 8GB/s throughput in each direction (total of 16GB/s).
Do the current G5s just not support a 64bit data bus at the moment? I haven't looked at IBM's specs for the thing.
I may be wrong I guess. Everything Steve was saying on stage led me to think it was a flash player.
WE'll know for sure in a few weeks when someone gets ahold of one, dismantles it and puts the pictures on the web.
...Macworld Expo in San Francisco, a $250 MP3 player with a 4GB hard drive that comes in several colors...
This was never a rumor. This was stated by Steve Jobs on stage when they released the Windows version of iTunes back in Octoberish.
From what I read to date they suspect a leak, they haven't isolate the problem to a leak yet.
The report so far is, as you stated, that an alarm was raised because the sensors have shown a steady decrease in cabin pressure over a few days.
Apparently the sensors that regulate the pressure don't see the pressure decrease, or the pressure would not be decreasing. (ie: if the regulators detected low pressure, they would compensate with more gas and the pressure would remain stable).
If the monitoring sensors see a decrease and the regulating sensors don't, then there's a malfunction. Whether that malfunction is in the regulator or monitoring sensors must be determined. Either way ISS is not working well and someone needs to figure out what is wrong and why.
Of course, a pressure leak is quite plausible given the hodge-podge nature of assembly and the relatively thin skin of the ISS. I personally don't consider tying a few tin cans together to be a space station. When they get around to welding girders and fastening skins like a standard building, then we'll talk about having a space station (IMO).
...Macworld Expo in San Francisco, a $250 MP3 player with a 4GB hard drive that comes in several colors ...
This statement in the main article is wrong. The iPod mini is not hard drive based, it is flash based.
What I meant is that the actual problem should be alerted. They've got a reported lowering of pressure. If its a leak, they should automatically know that, not have to guess and cross-check to see if it really is, or its a sensore error.
Or have they looked at the amount of gas in the storage tanks? Seriously, if there were a leak, you'd think they'd notice the extra gas usage. With all the sensors and remote monitoring I'd think this would be an automated alert.
NASA's monitoring, saftey and planning people may need to be sat down and slapped really soon. There's just WAY too many "simple" things they keep missing. Or perhaps this is another issue that's been lost in a PowerPoint presentaion?
It is pathetically slow.
With only 2GB, you will be constantly swapping songs on and off this thing, perhaps completely replacing the contents. You might be waiting 8+ minutes every day. Sure... you get 7 minutes for a single large file, but to write many smaller files your're in the 8-10 minute time frame.
For comparison, the first generation iPod's 5GB drive has a transfer rate of about 22MB/s on an ATA/66 bus, or about 5 minutes to fill the thing. The newer drives are even faster and use ATA/100 interfaces.
I guess we'll know as early as a few hours if a mini is released. If so, wait a few days and someone will have made a web page with photographs of the disassembled unit, then we'll know what's in it.
But the vertically stacked list effectively takes the same amount of space away from the main page.
Thumbnail vs list only affects the horizontal space taken up by the items. I don't see any way to do tabs in the "standard" way which only removes about 12 pixels from the web page display area.
The thumbnails are a nice idea, but really I'd just as soon use Expose to and multiple windows to do the same thing with Safari or iCab(my main browser do the EXCELLENT wildcard based configuration).
If the thumbnails could be put in a separate window that could be called up with a single key/button click, that would be nice.
"harsher laws" will have just about no effect on the amount of spam.
If you make unsolicited email illegal (which won't happen since it hasn't happened with the postal mail), then the bulk emailers will simply move off-shore, perhaps to Canada or Mexico, where sending spam is not illegal.
We will have as much chance of convicting forgeign spammers as we would of a foreigner threatening to kill the president while in their own country. Can't happen.
Despite the views of our current president, US law != international law.
By "opt in", does your company mean "If you want to do business with us, you must give use you email address and agree to recieve our junk mail?"
Because that's not "opt-in". Opt-in email should be separate and distinct from any business relationship you have with a customer.