If they don't want any negative publicity or reviews, then don't give them any positive reviews either, and just ignore them altogether. If the gaming press wants to still pretend that they have any kind of journalistic integrity, they should cut off any contact with any company that attempts to take advantage of this.
Tim: No, actually when I read the claims as a layperson, you know, not a lawyer, they look extremely broad to me. Now maybe in court they were narrowed, but in fact just reading the claims as somebody who doesn't know the system --
Dickinson: Well, that's why you need a good lawyer. I wouldn't suggest that you do surgery on yourself either. You need to consult a lawyer on what is probably one of the most arcane areas of --
Unfortunately, many of the amateur programmers on the receiving end of a patent dispute can't afford a patent lawyer or the time and resources to challenge it in court. In such a case, the very act of suing for patent infringement is a punishment itself, sustained on the alleged violator even before the defendent sets foot in court.
The Internet allows programmers working on their own the chance to distribute their software as widely as a patent-holding corporation, and until the system can allow someone to contest a patent without the need to hire a lawyer, this battle is going to be very lopsided
The problem is that in those days you would die and be forgotten, and anyone who cared about you would have no one to complain to, either because you went on your own and got yourself killed or anyone responsible for the trip could just ignore you. Today your death would be broadcast live on CNN and the media would be ripping NASA to shreds, convincing congress to cut back funding. There are just too many responsible for space exploration, and all of them would suffer for it if anything happened to you, no matter how willing you were to die for the cause.
What the world's nuclear powers should be doing is firing nukes at near earth objects. Make it into a competition of how many asteroids they can bag. Not only could we gain valuable data on how to deflect or destroy asteroids that might collide with earth, but we could also have NASA provide live video feeds on pay-per-view!
If, for instance, Coca-Cola were to print it's formula for Coke in a newspaper and label it a trade secret, maybe with some gimmicky lisence seal, is that really excersizing an adequate level of protection to keep it a trade secret? Can click-through lisences apply to such a tight restriction, especially one where the restriction is only permitted if the company makes an effort to make sure its secret is not released?
The CCA claims that the decryption keys that were used to write DeCSS were a trade secret. Mormally the keys would be encrypted in the player but in one case they were not. If every player contained the keys in a plaintext file, could they make the same claim?
The problem is it uses its own DRI interface, not Precision Insight's that is built into XF 4.0. If anything changes in XF 4 that involves DRI, we'd have to wait for nVidia to alter their DRI interface to match it.
A few years ago my cat would keep chewing my cables under my desk. I'd keep kicking him out from under there, but every now and then I'd be distracted long enough for him to slip under there before I noticed and kicked him out again. One time I was right in the middle of Ultima VII when he managed to slip under the desk. A few seconds later the computer abruptly resets to a "phthhhhhhhtt-clack" sound as my cat makes contact with the creamy copper center and literally gets knocked back against the desk and dashes out of the room. There's a strong odor of ozone mixed with a bit of burnt cat. He's never chewed on a cord again.
...and a battery. I should read the whole thing before I post, duh (you should too, and save us a flame war or too:).
Espresso slung from one side of my belt, AC generator from another... getting a little more clunky. Think I'm gonna have to start wearing a hand truck.
This thing is crying for a HMD and Twiddler:) It might be just a tad clunky, hard to tell from the pictures, but I think I could live with it.
Re:ATM charged, and found guilty..
on
QNX Crypt Cracked
·
· Score: 1
It's been like that here in the States for as long as I can remember. In hindsight, I find it just a bit curious that I actually chose which bank to open my primary checking account in purely on the basis that they had one of their own ATMs that I don't get charged for on my college's campus and virtually everywhere else I'd care to go. The bigger the bank, the more free ATMs... which one would you choose? Not like I had a choice anyway, since my new bank took over the bank that took over my old bank that I would have stuck with if it weren't for ATM charges...
Right now nVidia is on the top of the heap as far as Winbloze drivers go, so I don't think they believe they have much to gain from open source. The DRI layer IS the interface for modular 3D drivers. The whole point is that they don't need to rewrite the X server, unlike XFree86 3.x. By not using the DRI, they are breaking that modular interface that is such an advantage for Linux (although I think what you're talking about is kernel modules, which X has nothing to do with).
The only reason I can think of why they wouldn't use the DRI is that it would be incompatible with the way their windows drivers work, which is what The XFree86 drivers are based on. The only lisencing that i know of that would hold them back is anything with SGI over OpenGL, but they open sourced all that so that shouldn't be a problem.
I may have a clue, but i'm not %100 sure that I know what I'm talking about.
I find it hard to imagine that SGI would go through so much trouble to build up all this OpenGL infrastructure for linux only to have the one chip maker they're collaborating with on actual drivers go off and do their own thing. It's pretty obvious that SGI wants Linux to be as IRIX/SGI friendly as possible when they switch their workstations over to Merced/PC architecture, and my guess is that they're looking to nVidia to provide the 3d architecture for that platform. They seem pretty committed to adding to Linux's infrastructure and keeping it as open as possible, why let nVidia throw a monkey wrench in that?
Right now a lot of this is just speculation, and I hope that engineer who said it wouldn't be using DRI was SEVERELY misquoted. I've seen these drivers in action at LinuxWorld, and they will deliver the performance they've promised (wish I got the chance to look at the X setup). I like their hardware, and I really want to see this work. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt for now, but if this goes for the worse, my next card's gonna have "Matrox" printed on it.
Disclaimer: They gave me a free T-shirt at LinuxWorld, so my opinion could be considered biased.
I did something very similar for my Unix class last semester. I agree, writing your own shell is a great opportunity to familiarize students with the nature of I/O and processes in *nix. It's a good bridge between the system level stuff and the user interface, and gave me a much better understanding of how processes actually get run.
Perhaps you should look at a little precedent called a LICENSE. Music CDs don't come with lengthy documents that tell you exactly what you can and cannot do with that music if you want to listen to it. The only right he has to the code in the first place is that granted to him by the GPL, which has the stipulation that anyone who gets his derivative work must be granted the same rights to the derivative code. The GPL is no less valid than the EULA that comes with retail quake that says you cannot copy and redistribute Quake or any derivative work at all. Under your agrument, any mod maker could burn a cd of his mod complete with retail quake and all its game data (which are not open source) in violation of that EULA and sell it in CompUSA without lawyers tearing him to shreds.
Also, I fail to see where Slade is supposed to get the support necessary to defeat someone who has the money to give ferarris away and the wrath of a thousand Slashdot incited Open Source zealots who are ready to mortgage their homes to Johnny Cochrane to see the GPL held up in court, especially since he doesn't have a legal leg to stand on. If he restricts the rights of those who get the binaries, he loses the rigts to the code. End of story.
This is a good demonstration of the fundamental differences between how Windows people and Linux people regard software. In the Linux world, open source code is sacred and the GPL (and similar licenses) is not something to be treated likely.
The closed nature of Windows, however, treats software like magical objects whose inner workings need not be understood. As a result, users have little contact with source code, and frankly don't even want to see it. The software provider is actually doing the user a favor by hiding the code, since they can't break what already looks like a complex and fragile thing. Even scarier is the idea that someone else could modify the code and do something evil with it. Since the average Windows user wouldn't know malicious code if they saw it, better safe than sorry. This attitude has been reinforced in the Windows gaming world every time a game is hacked or the game source modified to cheat. So to most Windows users something like the GPL is purely academic and outside the realm of their concern, and anyone who actually would want the source code would be up to no good. They don't care who gets the code, as long as it works, and if it means someone else getting the code means it doesn't work then it's more convenient to just not bother releasing it.
Slashdot Mirror
If they don't want any negative publicity or reviews, then don't give them any positive reviews either, and just ignore them altogether. If the gaming press wants to still pretend that they have any kind of journalistic integrity, they should cut off any contact with any company that attempts to take advantage of this.
Tim: No, actually when I read the claims as a layperson, you know, not a lawyer, they look extremely broad to me. Now maybe in court they were narrowed, but in fact just reading the claims as somebody who doesn't know the system --
Dickinson: Well, that's why you need a good lawyer. I wouldn't suggest that you do surgery on yourself either. You need to consult a lawyer on what is probably one of the most arcane areas of --
Unfortunately, many of the amateur programmers on the receiving end of a patent dispute can't afford a patent lawyer or the time and resources to challenge it in court. In such a case, the very act of suing for patent infringement is a punishment itself, sustained on the alleged violator even before the defendent sets foot in court.
The Internet allows programmers working on their own the chance to distribute their software as widely as a patent-holding corporation, and until the system can allow someone to contest a patent without the need to hire a lawyer, this battle is going to be very lopsided
Does the emulator emulate the IA-64's IA-32 emulation? :)
The problem is that in those days you would die and be forgotten, and anyone who cared about you would have no one to complain to, either because you went on your own and got yourself killed or anyone responsible for the trip could just ignore you. Today your death would be broadcast live on CNN and the media would be ripping NASA to shreds, convincing congress to cut back funding. There are just too many responsible for space exploration, and all of them would suffer for it if anything happened to you, no matter how willing you were to die for the cause.
What the world's nuclear powers should be doing is firing nukes at near earth objects. Make it into a competition of how many asteroids they can bag. Not only could we gain valuable data on how to deflect or destroy asteroids that might collide with earth, but we could also have NASA provide live video feeds on pay-per-view!
If, for instance, Coca-Cola were to print it's formula for Coke in a newspaper and label it a trade secret, maybe with some gimmicky lisence seal, is that really excersizing an adequate level of protection to keep it a trade secret? Can click-through lisences apply to such a tight restriction, especially one where the restriction is only permitted if the company makes an effort to make sure its secret is not released?
The CCA claims that the decryption keys that were used to write DeCSS were a trade secret. Mormally the keys would be encrypted in the player but in one case they were not. If every player contained the keys in a plaintext file, could they make the same claim?
that the Intel disco-clean-room-dancers are gonna die from cancer?
Tell that to nVidia ;)
The problem is it uses its own DRI interface, not Precision Insight's that is built into XF 4.0. If anything changes in XF 4 that involves DRI, we'd have to wait for nVidia to alter their DRI interface to match it.
The server's slow enough now! The last thing I need is the Slashdot effect.
A few years ago my cat would keep chewing my cables under my desk. I'd keep kicking him out from under there, but every now and then I'd be distracted long enough for him to slip under there before I noticed and kicked him out again. One time I was right in the middle of Ultima VII when he managed to slip under the desk. A few seconds later the computer abruptly resets to a "phthhhhhhhtt-clack" sound as my cat makes contact with the creamy copper center and literally gets knocked back against the desk and dashes out of the room. There's a strong odor of ozone mixed with a bit of burnt cat. He's never chewed on a cord again.
when do we get the Adult Online Privacy Protection Act? :)
One of the pricing options is no OS at an $83 difference. It's nice to see a device like this Window$ Tax-free :)
...and a battery. I should read the whole thing before I post, duh (you should too, and save us a flame war or too :).
Espresso slung from one side of my belt, AC generator from another... getting a little more clunky. Think I'm gonna have to start wearing a hand truck.
This thing is crying for a HMD and Twiddler :)
It might be just a tad clunky, hard to tell from the pictures, but I think I could live with it.
It's been like that here in the States for as long as I can remember. In hindsight, I find it just a bit curious that I actually chose which bank to open my primary checking account in purely on the basis that they had one of their own ATMs that I don't get charged for on my college's campus and virtually everywhere else I'd care to go. The bigger the bank, the more free ATMs... which one would you choose? Not like I had a choice anyway, since my new bank took over the bank that took over my old bank that I would have stuck with if it weren't for ATM charges...
i'd like to see you actually use those drivers on that page. If you did you'd probably be whining right along with them :)
Hmm, what does this mean for this guy, who seems to be trying to fill up Open*L with the rest of the alphabet? :)
b .html
http://people.we.mediaone.net/seanpalmer/openli
I wonder if or how OpenAL (the OpenGL-like 3D audio library from loki) might fit into this?
Right now nVidia is on the top of the heap as far as Winbloze drivers go, so I don't think they believe they have much to gain from open source.
The DRI layer IS the interface for modular 3D drivers. The whole point is that they don't need to rewrite the X server, unlike XFree86 3.x. By not using the DRI, they are breaking that modular interface that is such an advantage for Linux (although I think what you're talking about is kernel modules, which X has nothing to do with).
The only reason I can think of why they wouldn't use the DRI is that it would be incompatible with the way their windows drivers work, which is what The XFree86 drivers are based on. The only lisencing that i know of that would hold them back is anything with SGI over OpenGL, but they open sourced all that so that shouldn't be a problem.
I may have a clue, but i'm not %100 sure that I know what I'm talking about.
I find it hard to imagine that SGI would go through so much trouble to build up all this OpenGL infrastructure for linux only to have the one chip maker they're collaborating with on actual drivers go off and do their own thing. It's pretty obvious that SGI wants Linux to be as IRIX/SGI friendly as possible when they switch their workstations over to Merced/PC architecture, and my guess is that they're looking to nVidia to provide the 3d architecture for that platform. They seem pretty committed to adding to Linux's infrastructure and keeping it as open as possible, why let nVidia throw a monkey wrench in that?
Right now a lot of this is just speculation, and I hope that engineer who said it wouldn't be using DRI was SEVERELY misquoted. I've seen these drivers in action at LinuxWorld, and they will deliver the performance they've promised (wish I got the chance to look at the X setup). I like their hardware, and I really want to see this work. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt for now, but if this goes for the worse, my next card's gonna have "Matrox" printed on it.
Disclaimer: They gave me a free T-shirt at LinuxWorld, so my opinion could be considered biased.
I did something very similar for my Unix class last semester. I agree, writing your own shell is a great opportunity to familiarize students with the nature of I/O and processes in *nix. It's a good bridge between the system level stuff and the user interface, and gave me a much better understanding of how processes actually get run.
Something tells me these things could cause problems with slot loading drives (they work like car scd players).
Perhaps you should look at a little precedent called a LICENSE. Music CDs don't come with lengthy documents that tell you exactly what you can and cannot do with that music if you want to listen to it. The only right he has to the code in the first place is that granted to him by the GPL, which has the stipulation that anyone who gets his derivative work must be granted the same rights to the derivative code. The GPL is no less valid than the EULA that comes with retail quake that says you cannot copy and redistribute Quake or any derivative work at all. Under your agrument, any mod maker could burn a cd of his mod complete with retail quake and all its game data (which are not open source) in violation of that EULA and sell it in CompUSA without lawyers tearing him to shreds.
Also, I fail to see where Slade is supposed to get the support necessary to defeat someone who has the money to give ferarris away and the wrath of a thousand Slashdot incited Open Source zealots who are ready to mortgage their homes to Johnny Cochrane to see the GPL held up in court, especially since he doesn't have a legal leg to stand on. If he restricts the rights of those who get the binaries, he loses the rigts to the code. End of story.
This is a good demonstration of the fundamental differences between how Windows people and Linux people regard software. In the Linux world, open source code is sacred and the GPL (and similar licenses) is not something to be treated likely.
The closed nature of Windows, however, treats software like magical objects whose inner workings need not be understood. As a result, users have little contact with source code, and frankly don't even want to see it. The software provider is actually doing the user a favor by hiding the code, since they can't break what already looks like a complex and fragile thing. Even scarier is the idea that someone else could modify the code and do something evil with it. Since the average Windows user wouldn't know malicious code if they saw it, better safe than sorry. This attitude has been reinforced in the Windows gaming world every time a game is hacked or the game source modified to cheat. So to most Windows users something like the GPL is purely academic and outside the realm of their concern, and anyone who actually would want the source code would be up to no good. They don't care who gets the code, as long as it works, and if it means someone else getting the code means it doesn't work then it's more convenient to just not bother releasing it.
Did that make any sense?