It isn't because the KHTML developers want them to do more. That isn't the complaint. The complaint is that all the Slashbots read the Acid2 article and assume that those changes will quickly make it into Konq thanks to Apple's good will. That isn't the case. It is the misperception that is being complained about.
I think the problem is that technology has made non-commercial distribution means so efficient as to outpace the commercial means. I wouldn't mind strict enforcment in exchange for much shorter copyright terms. The current situation is obviously not going to benefit anyone in the long term. The content producers are slitting their own throats. Maybe they'll realize that at some point.
You haven't seen my dad's Win98 setup, have you? I've reinstalled it twice and it only takes a few months for ie to stop working completely. Some of the people that I have told to switch to Mac have made the same complaint of, "But won't I have to learn everything all over again?" I tell them that there is nothing to learn, it just works. While they don't believe me at first, they come back reporting that indeed, they didn't have to learn anything to do what they need to.
Go find the last story on this bill. You'll be shocked at how happy everyone is about it. I was amazed, since/. has consistently seen Clearplay as an evil censorship issue instead of seeing the freedom to watch media as you please side of the arguement.
I agree that three years in jail is harsh, and probably out of line when compared to drunk driving. I would guess that on your first offense the judge isn't likely to send you to prison for three years. What would you suggest is an appropriate punishment? I would guess that most pirates do not have the means to pay for the financial damages that early release of some movies (The Hulk, for example) can cause. If you do $20 million in damages and you can't pay for it how long should you go to jail?
Have you read the bill, or even the recent/. story that portrayed it in a positive light? All you slashbots just riff off the original post without doing any thinking on your own. This bill has its pros and cons, and some of the pros involve the family.
So you think there is a legitimate need to distribute movies before they are released?
My concern with the bill is the sections regarding commercial content. You can skip things that are offensive to you but not ads? What about the paid placement of Marlboro ads in Superman II? Would skipping that be illegal still?
In any case it is interesting to see how the responses by the Slashbots vary depending on how the headline is written. When these services are mentioned as "censorship" everybody goes nuts about how evil they are. When the story is posted as being about giving you more "freedom" the same idiots praise it. It would be interesting to compare the last few Clearplay/Cleanflicks stories and look for inconsistencies in the attitudes of individual posters based on the headlines.
Actually a several people have taken my advice and bought a Mac. All of them have come back to me raving about it. The majority of people though are not willing to take that step. So for them it is installing Firefox and:
regular patching, defragging, spyware software and anti-virus software (phew!).
as you so eloquently put it. Not really, which is easier? Replacing your Win98 clunker with a Mac, or the process you have listed?
1 - People ask me all the time how to clean up their system. I tell them to switch to Linux or buy a Mac, knowing that they will do neither. I then tell them that they need to never use ie again and start using Firefox, and update it when the red arrow shows up. So in these cases I'm not telling them because I care, I am telling them because they cared enough to ask how to solve their problem.
2 - Network effects. The more people that are using a product, the better it is. Even if my mom and dad aren't going to hack on Firefox, their choice of browser will show up in the logs of the pages they visit. Smart webmasters will make sure their pages work well with popular browsers. It is to my advantage for the browser I use to be popular (assuming it is secure).
IBM has a pure tablet, and has for years, but it isn't in production. I've used it for demos, it is pretty nice. It is thin and light and has a nice cradle that it docks to. It runs Linux. If there were enough customer demand for it they'd build it. Believe me, customers have seen it, and it pops up at demos at trade shows from time to time.
You can also do single sign on with a smart card or a biometric or both. If you are doing single sign on without at least one of these then you are probably making things less secure.
There are plenty of products out there that can fill in your passwords for applications that don't support kerberos. The problem is finding out which ones are really secure.
I've been very busy recently installing smart card based single sign on at various companies. You have to remember one password, to open your smartcard. This can be combined with a biometric if you like. The smart card stores and manages all the rest of your passwords, which can be randomized if you like. So users don't even know their passwords, and the passwords are truely random gibberish. Storing the passwords on the smart card gives extra security.
In my old office I would always know when my cellphone was going to ring about a half a second before it did. I simply set it next to my office phone and the office phone would buzz in an odd way immediately prior to the cellphone ringing.
Similarly I have witnessed clock radios doing the same thing.
You are correct, it seems he didn't have a license. I am mistaken on some other points as well, it turns out. Of course the question of how you can "not have" a license but still have enough access to perform the operations you need to to reverse engineer a protocol is an interesting question.
Also, I do think that the question of whether Tridge did this with an intent to get the license revoked is an interesting and relevant question. But it is probably one that we won't get an answer to.
It seems to me that what he asked for is much more of a "That's what Google is for..." than what I suggested is. In any case, posting the question the way I suggested is more likely to generate a conversation that is interesting to me than, "I don't want to buy a large memory system from IBM or Sun. How can I build my own."
No, he qualified that by saying "probably". In any case I don't want to know how it will be configured, I want to know what he wants to use it for and what he thinks the benefits will be./.ers are pretty smart and might be able to suggest something better to him.
Rather than saying, "I need this to solve my problem, and I'm not saying what my problem is!" it is better to say, "Here is my problem, I am thinking of doing this. How can I do that, or are there better solutions that I haven't thought of?" He'll get better answers that way.
If he doesn't know where to purchase a large memory system then it is possible that he doesn't really know if that is what he wants.
Which is why you say this: What's being shown here is exactly why Closed Source is bad.
Right? And this: I'll say it again, it's awesome that it's been displayed here in the clear that this is exactly why proprietary formats/protocols are Bad(tm). It's called lock-in and apparently everyone but Torvalds knew about it.
Of course the viral nature of the GPL isn't a form of lock-in, right?
The license wasn't yanked at random. It was yanked because it was violated. There was an agreement and someone wasn't abiding by the terms of it. I think your concern should be over entering into an agreement that you won't live up to. This good reason/bad reason arguement that you are trying to make rings hollow.
If they had been using an open solution then development could not have been interrupted by a vendor for ANY reason.
Are you saying that if they were using a GPLed tool and decided to violate the GPL that their license could't be revoked? You need to think this through more completely.
Slashdot Mirror
It isn't because the KHTML developers want them to do more. That isn't the complaint. The complaint is that all the Slashbots read the Acid2 article and assume that those changes will quickly make it into Konq thanks to Apple's good will. That isn't the case. It is the misperception that is being complained about.
My brother has asked him on his blog. No response yet.
Especially when the copy that was distributed is an incomplete work-print with temp effects, right? Not that the finished movie wasn't trash...
I think the problem is that technology has made non-commercial distribution means so efficient as to outpace the commercial means. I wouldn't mind strict enforcment in exchange for much shorter copyright terms. The current situation is obviously not going to benefit anyone in the long term. The content producers are slitting their own throats. Maybe they'll realize that at some point.
Good point. Dark Helmet is probably after me now for such an act of defiance.
As for the commercial content, I read the bill about a week ago. Did that get taken out in conference committee?
You haven't seen my dad's Win98 setup, have you? I've reinstalled it twice and it only takes a few months for ie to stop working completely. Some of the people that I have told to switch to Mac have made the same complaint of, "But won't I have to learn everything all over again?" I tell them that there is nothing to learn, it just works. While they don't believe me at first, they come back reporting that indeed, they didn't have to learn anything to do what they need to.
I agree that three years in jail is harsh, and probably out of line when compared to drunk driving. I would guess that on your first offense the judge isn't likely to send you to prison for three years. What would you suggest is an appropriate punishment? I would guess that most pirates do not have the means to pay for the financial damages that early release of some movies (The Hulk, for example) can cause. If you do $20 million in damages and you can't pay for it how long should you go to jail?
Have you read the bill, or even the recent /. story that portrayed it in a positive light? All you slashbots just riff off the original post without doing any thinking on your own. This bill has its pros and cons, and some of the pros involve the family.
My concern with the bill is the sections regarding commercial content. You can skip things that are offensive to you but not ads? What about the paid placement of Marlboro ads in Superman II? Would skipping that be illegal still?
In any case it is interesting to see how the responses by the Slashbots vary depending on how the headline is written. When these services are mentioned as "censorship" everybody goes nuts about how evil they are. When the story is posted as being about giving you more "freedom" the same idiots praise it. It would be interesting to compare the last few Clearplay/Cleanflicks stories and look for inconsistencies in the attitudes of individual posters based on the headlines.
Sheep! All of them!
regular patching, defragging, spyware software and anti-virus software (phew!).
as you so eloquently put it. Not really, which is easier? Replacing your Win98 clunker with a Mac, or the process you have listed?
1 - People ask me all the time how to clean up their system. I tell them to switch to Linux or buy a Mac, knowing that they will do neither. I then tell them that they need to never use ie again and start using Firefox, and update it when the red arrow shows up. So in these cases I'm not telling them because I care, I am telling them because they cared enough to ask how to solve their problem.
2 - Network effects. The more people that are using a product, the better it is. Even if my mom and dad aren't going to hack on Firefox, their choice of browser will show up in the logs of the pages they visit. Smart webmasters will make sure their pages work well with popular browsers. It is to my advantage for the browser I use to be popular (assuming it is secure).
Does Steve know that "we" spend so much time spinning things on /.?
IBM has a pure tablet, and has for years, but it isn't in production. I've used it for demos, it is pretty nice. It is thin and light and has a nice cradle that it docks to. It runs Linux. If there were enough customer demand for it they'd build it. Believe me, customers have seen it, and it pops up at demos at trade shows from time to time.
There are plenty of products out there that can fill in your passwords for applications that don't support kerberos. The problem is finding out which ones are really secure.
I thought that Doug Englebart invented point and click at SRI.
I've been very busy recently installing smart card based single sign on at various companies. You have to remember one password, to open your smartcard. This can be combined with a biometric if you like. The smart card stores and manages all the rest of your passwords, which can be randomized if you like. So users don't even know their passwords, and the passwords are truely random gibberish. Storing the passwords on the smart card gives extra security.
And that my friends, is true innovation! Let someone else come up with a good idea and then implement a feature identical replacement.
Actually one of the nice things to come out of this is the work Linus has done on git. At least someone is trying to come up with something new.
Similarly I have witnessed clock radios doing the same thing.
Also, I do think that the question of whether Tridge did this with an intent to get the license revoked is an interesting and relevant question. But it is probably one that we won't get an answer to.
It seems to me that what he asked for is much more of a "That's what Google is for..." than what I suggested is. In any case, posting the question the way I suggested is more likely to generate a conversation that is interesting to me than, "I don't want to buy a large memory system from IBM or Sun. How can I build my own."
Rather than saying, "I need this to solve my problem, and I'm not saying what my problem is!" it is better to say, "Here is my problem, I am thinking of doing this. How can I do that, or are there better solutions that I haven't thought of?" He'll get better answers that way.
If he doesn't know where to purchase a large memory system then it is possible that he doesn't really know if that is what he wants.
Which is why you say this:
What's being shown here is exactly why Closed Source is bad.
Right? And this:
I'll say it again, it's awesome that it's been displayed here in the clear that this is exactly why proprietary formats/protocols are Bad(tm). It's called lock-in and apparently everyone but Torvalds knew about it.
Of course the viral nature of the GPL isn't a form of lock-in, right?
If they had been using an open solution then development could not have been interrupted by a vendor for ANY reason.
Are you saying that if they were using a GPLed tool and decided to violate the GPL that their license could't be revoked? You need to think this through more completely.
I am pretty sure that Battlestar Galactica is filmed in Canada as well.