The Bluetooth Spec, Vol. 2 Profiles describes a Generic Object Exchange Profile. There are a couple of sub-profiles, Object Push and Synchronization that will describe transferring varioius data objects. vObjects (vCard, vCalendard, , etc objects) can be transferred.
The idea is that both the sender and receiver understand the type of object that is being transferred, where it should go and how to use it.
The Synchronization profile describes a method of synchronizing a desktop PC with a PDA, for instance.
What's this linux thingie? A new camera? Better TP, perhaps?
I'm sure it couldn't be an operating system since according to this Wired article we have the Honorable Justice Jackson and various industry pundits salivating at the chance to destroy Microsoft for, among other reasons, there being no other choices for a PC operating system other than Microsoft products.
As we marched, we chanted "Assembly Is A Right!" with peace signs in the air, and moved towards the "no protest zone". About two blocks outside of the designated zone, we found ourselves trapped by urban control vehicles and black-clad riot police. And then the tear gas came.
You know, Michael, had you stayed out of the God Damn "No Protest Zone" you wouldn't have gotten all that nasty gas in your sensitive little eyes.
Your story is blatantly one-sided and you have noone but yourself to blame!
This whole MP3 deal has me shaking my head. Clearly, it's wrong to obtain a copy of a song without paying for it. We all know it's wrong! Personally, I see nothing wrong with ripping my CD collection and playing it back for my own use. I'm not too sure if it's legal, but I'm still gonna do it. What is wrong is when I start sharing the songs with other people that don't own the original CD.
Again, I'm not too sure if it's legal if I share an MP3 with someone that does own the CD, but I don't really make a distinction between that and this second person making their own MP3. It may not be legal, but I'll still probably do it. And I'm pretty sure that Lars isn't gonna kick my ass in either of these two scenarios.
But I keep reading about people who say that it's OK to download songs from Napster because they already own the CD. I can't prove that this isn't always the case, but I'm convinced that it is. Or they justify blatant theft because the recording industry makes too much profit on CD's. Hmmm... This just doesn't make sense to me.
Now, we have Senator Hatch telling a private citizen, no, an entire industry how they must distribute their music! Hopefully the rest of congress will be able to moderate his views.
However, I'm still waiting for one single, sensible argument that justifies trading MP3's on the scale that Napster allows. I don't know if Napster is committing any crime, but I certainly believe that they make it much easier for two people to commit a crime.
This can be completely anonymous -- it's just like the paper voting slip you're given for some elections once you've shown ID. It has no identifying marks, but you only get one once you've authenticated yourself.
If it's been electronically signed, then it has an identifying mark -- The signature. Your relying on the willingness of the signing authority to insure that there's no trail from the signature to your ID. I'm not too paranoid, but I could imagine someone insuring that just such a trail would exist. I guess you would still have to link the ID to a particular vote, but that's just another indirection...
Slashdot Mirror
The Bluetooth Spec, Vol. 2 Profiles describes a Generic Object Exchange Profile. There are a couple of sub-profiles, Object Push and Synchronization that will describe transferring varioius data objects. vObjects (vCard, vCalendard, , etc objects) can be transferred.
The idea is that both the sender and receiver understand the type of object that is being transferred, where it should go and how to use it.
The Synchronization profile describes a method of synchronizing a desktop PC with a PDA, for instance.
What's this linux thingie? A new camera? Better TP, perhaps?
I'm sure it couldn't be an operating system since according to this Wired article we have the Honorable Justice Jackson and various industry pundits salivating at the chance to destroy Microsoft for, among other reasons, there being no other choices for a PC operating system other than Microsoft products.
You know, Michael, had you stayed out of the God Damn "No Protest Zone" you wouldn't have gotten all that nasty gas in your sensitive little eyes.
Your story is blatantly one-sided and you have noone but yourself to blame!
This whole MP3 deal has me shaking my head. Clearly, it's wrong to obtain a copy of a song without paying for it. We all know it's wrong! Personally, I see nothing wrong with ripping my CD collection and playing it back for my own use. I'm not too sure if it's legal, but I'm still gonna do it. What is wrong is when I start sharing the songs with other people that don't own the original CD.
Again, I'm not too sure if it's legal if I share an MP3 with someone that does own the CD, but I don't really make a distinction between that and this second person making their own MP3. It may not be legal, but I'll still probably do it. And I'm pretty sure that Lars isn't gonna kick my ass in either of these two scenarios.
But I keep reading about people who say that it's OK to download songs from Napster because they already own the CD. I can't prove that this isn't always the case, but I'm convinced that it is. Or they justify blatant theft because the recording industry makes too much profit on CD's. Hmmm... This just doesn't make sense to me.
Now, we have Senator Hatch telling a private citizen, no, an entire industry how they must distribute their music! Hopefully the rest of congress will be able to moderate his views.
However, I'm still waiting for one single, sensible argument that justifies trading MP3's on the scale that Napster allows. I don't know if Napster is committing any crime, but I certainly believe that they make it much easier for two people to commit a crime.