You can't go by what Intentia's website shows now, I suspect they changed their scheme (also known as 'locking the barn door after the barn burns down').
If you do a Google search for intentia results, at least one early entry points to the Intentia 'press room' containing an earlier quarterly results announcement. The announcement page itself does have a 24 bit hex ID number in the URL (BA45EE etc) that would be hard to guess for a new quarter. But on the announcement page is this link:
is extremely easy to extrapolate to subsequent quarters. I have no doubt that's what Reuters did , for this company and many others with similarly easy naming schemes and early uploading schedules. And I have no doubt that other journalists pull the same trick. In this case, a company with results they'd rather nobody noticed has jumped at the opportunity to change the subject.
The original concept of copyright was based on the notion that by producing creative works, authors benefit society, and so were entitled to make a living from a time-limited legal monopoly on the reproduction and distribution of their creations -- which would otherwise be technically easy for anyone to do, if the law didn't forbid it. As long as the creator (or other owner of copyright) had that control, everything else was basically OK. There was a clear and logical distinction between copying a book and reading it, and nobody was interested in preventing someone from reading, only in preventing someone from unauthorized printing.
The new notion of copyright seems to be based on a cyptographically and legally enforced "secure pipeline" from the content creator to each individually authorized end user. All new developments trend towards this end. Unauthorized viewing is as serious as unauthorized copying, in fact the distinction often disappears. The right to make a living from printing and selling a creative work has been replaced by the right to control how a creative work is used, and to be compensated for each use, every step of the way.
It is an entirely new paradigm, and if it succeeds in establishing itself, an entirely new information economy will result. Unfortunately, free speech will be an early casualty. Orwell's 1984 will no longer be a dystopian speculation, but a first-year business text.
Speaking of bets, I'll bet that when and if the Spider-Man franchise has spun its fifth movie, the franchise will be way more "elephantine" and clueless than STAR WARS is now.
Although I am disappointed in some of what Lucas has done with his franchise, let credit be given where due: the rarest achievement in cinema is the preplotted multi-part blockbuster film saga. Arguably THE GODFATHER was first, although Coppola could have quit at any time with honors. Most other series make it up as they go along. STAR WARS was the only prewritten SF saga until Peter Jackson came along with his Tolkien trilogy, and even then Jackson had the advantage of shooting everything at once and releasing at leisure.
Last I checked that stood for "National American Space Association," so this would be quite a surprise!
NASA stands for National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The Hubble Space Telescope is actually a joint project with the European Space Agency (ESA).
I want an open source soccer league, so when someone scores the announcer screams
GPLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL!
Re:WTF is a terrawatt?
on
Lunar Power
·
· Score: 2
We'll give the author and the researcher the houses right next to the microwave receivers so they can then deal with the inherent problems in controlling a 240,000 mile long MASER beam...
The collectors could be anchored offshore to lessen the risks of misadjustment - but if they are on land, relatively desolate areas could be chosen, not right downtown like the picture in the article shows.
We're already getting upwards of a kilowatt-hour per square meter in most places on earth that need it - why not use what's here?
I assume you mean 1KWh per day, otherwise the units don't match! A good commercial PV delivers around 150W per square meter at peak. Unfortunately they seldom operate at peak. PV also has suffered from costing more energy to fabricate per square meter than it delivers in its useful lifetime.
If ground-based PV were deployed on the scale necessary to eliminate fossil/nuclear at present consumption rates, it would have a profound impact on the Earth's ecology.
If space-based PV (or equivalent tech) succeeds, it will share with fossil, nuclear and geothermal energy the characteristic of adding to the Earth's daily solar budget, thereby contributing to global warming. If space-delivered energy in any form is truly easier, cheaper and cleaner than the other technologies, then Earth power consumption will skyrocket to match it, and the solar budget impact will increase.
Eventually, it may become necessary to radiate waste heat away from the Earth with a maser or other technology. Possibly some kind of exchanger could be built to cycle waste heat back into the power grid.
An alternative to direct beaming of space-collected energy, by the way, is to covert the energy to some highly enriched form in space and re-enter fuel cells into the atmosphere for use down here. The ultimate example would be anti-matter, which could be fabricated off-Earth and chuted in for transport to power plants.
What matters about AOL adopting Mozilla is not that IE would somehow lose its majority share, but that a non-IE browser would subtend an important enough fraction of visitors that site designers could ill afford to ignore it. The IE-only travesties of today might give way to something approaching a standards compliant Web.
Regardless of the merits of the copy protection schemes used, one change that MUST be made by software and hardware manufacturers is to "survive" the insertion of a copy-protected CD in a more robust way. Firmware and persistent OS settings should not be affected, and crashes should be prevented.
The nuisance factor of this "behavior on insertion" problem is currently minimized because so few albums have copy protection schemes. Before very long, most or all major label releases will carry some kind of copy protection. If the industry doesn't harden its drivers and OS's, chaos will result.
By the way, when CD copy protection is the norm, clever people with EAC and similar programs will still be able to rip, but Joe Casual User with his "Automatically rip as you play" pre-installed kiddy software won't, which is probably what the RIAA is really aiming for.
If the expiration code itself is open source, then IT would have to expire, at which point it would no longer be able to expire the package it's embedded in!
This is a non-problem.
on
Google Juice
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
The value of a search engine lies in its ability to return usable results when you are actually looking for something. Most of the "exploits" people are discussing don't affect Google's usefulness as a search engine. (When is the last time you searched for "talentless hack" or, for that matter, "david gallagher"? Only someone already participating in the prank, or curious about it, would even know it existed.) And "Googlewhacking" is the most harmless of all - the only search results it can "affect" are its own, as listed winning word pairs lose their uniqueness at the next crawl. So what?
Google folks are not stupid. If the integrity of searches that people really make is affected, they will change the code.
In the meantime, is it really necessary to squelch every last bit of fun on the Net?
A simple workaround that avoids penalizing content contributors would be to never show an ad (or charge a no-ad pageview) when a user views his own submitted story, journal or comment. You could be generous and extend that to viewing children of the user's own comment.
Or is A.I. yet another overhyped, self-serving fantasy by deluded scientists and technocrats talking mostly to one another, foisting their ill-conceived, poorly-engineered creations on an unsuspecting public?
I do like that "yet another." Perhaps Jon would care to list the previous overhyped, self-serving fantasies from deluded scientists, etc?
Re:We (probably) won't ever actually ACHIEVE AI
on
Arguing A.I.
·
· Score: 1
This is precisely correct. Computers will never be considered to have human intelligence, because we will ADJUST the definition of intelligence, as necessary, to ensure that it always lies beyond what machines have been made to do.
A few hundred years from now there will be a machine that can beat you in tennis, write a novel, win a beauty contest, and raise your child -- and our descendants will absolutely agree that it is not really intelligent.
Re: it's not better at low rates
on
Non-MP3 Codecs?
·
· Score: 1
> Fraunhofer Professional MP3 codec at 64kbps...How much does that cost?
Um, it costs the same for everything except a couple of very high bit rates. I think the current price from Opticom is $50 for "Advanced Plus" and $200 for "Professional." Also as I said, I use it at 56kbps, not 64kbps. Compared to the other expenses of running a streaming station, that part is trivial.
Re: it's not better at low rates
on
Non-MP3 Codecs?
·
· Score: 1
I encode acoustic music at 56kbps for an Internet station. I have carefully evaluated all available encoders at that rate (or as close to it as their UI's will allow me to get), because I want the best sound for my bandwidth. Nothing beats the Fraunhofer Professional MP3 codec at these rates. I can achieve FM quality at 1-1.5mb per song. When I try the same thing with Ogg it sounds washed-out and fuzzy.
I wish the Ogg Vorbis people well, but from an acoustic standpoint they are not yet an option for me.
Remember the Golden Rule of the net: "Be conservative in what you send and liberal in what you accept."
The proper Net approach in my view would be to promulgate as much free software as possible that (a) converts Word to something else on input if you like, and (b) makes it easy to create and attach free-format documents to all the popular MUA's.
Browbeating other users with "I refuse to read that, send it differently" replies is rude and counterproductive.
If editors can moderate our posts without triggering the email notification, that's wrong, I didn't know it, and I apologize & agree they should fix it.
Slashdot Mirror
If you do a Google search for intentia results, at least one early entry points to the Intentia 'press room' containing an earlier quarterly results announcement. The announcement page itself does have a 24 bit hex ID number in the URL (BA45EE etc) that would be hard to guess for a new quarter. But on the announcement page is this link:
Now the URL (which no longer works, natch) of the PDF file being linked to: is extremely easy to extrapolate to subsequent quarters. I have no doubt that's what Reuters did , for this company and many others with similarly easy naming schemes and early uploading schedules. And I have no doubt that other journalists pull the same trick. In this case, a company with results they'd rather nobody noticed has jumped at the opportunity to change the subject.I'd like to propose Anser's Counterlaw:
Anyone mentioning Godwin's Law is automatically presumed to have requested that the current thread be doubled in length.
The original concept of copyright was based on the notion that by producing creative works, authors benefit society, and so were entitled to make a living from a time-limited legal monopoly on the reproduction and distribution of their creations -- which would otherwise be technically easy for anyone to do, if the law didn't forbid it. As long as the creator (or other owner of copyright) had that control, everything else was basically OK. There was a clear and logical distinction between copying a book and reading it, and nobody was interested in preventing someone from reading, only in preventing someone from unauthorized printing.
The new notion of copyright seems to be based on a cyptographically and legally enforced "secure pipeline" from the content creator to each individually authorized end user. All new developments trend towards this end. Unauthorized viewing is as serious as unauthorized copying, in fact the distinction often disappears. The right to make a living from printing and selling a creative work has been replaced by the right to control how a creative work is used, and to be compensated for each use, every step of the way.
It is an entirely new paradigm, and if it succeeds in establishing itself, an entirely new information economy will result. Unfortunately, free speech will be an early casualty. Orwell's 1984 will no longer be a dystopian speculation, but a first-year business text.
Speaking of bets, I'll bet that when and if the Spider-Man franchise has spun its fifth movie, the franchise will be way more "elephantine" and clueless than STAR WARS is now.
Although I am disappointed in some of what Lucas has done with his franchise, let credit be given where due: the rarest achievement in cinema is the preplotted multi-part blockbuster film saga. Arguably THE GODFATHER was first, although Coppola could have quit at any time with honors. Most other series make it up as they go along. STAR WARS was the only prewritten SF saga until Peter Jackson came along with his Tolkien trilogy, and even then Jackson had the advantage of shooting everything at once and releasing at leisure.
NASA stands for National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The Hubble Space Telescope is actually a joint project with the European Space Agency (ESA).
I want an open source soccer league, so when someone scores the announcer screams
GPLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL!
If ground-based PV were deployed on the scale necessary to eliminate fossil/nuclear at present consumption rates, it would have a profound impact on the Earth's ecology.
If space-based PV (or equivalent tech) succeeds, it will share with fossil, nuclear and geothermal energy the characteristic of adding to the Earth's daily solar budget, thereby contributing to global warming. If space-delivered energy in any form is truly easier, cheaper and cleaner than the other technologies, then Earth power consumption will skyrocket to match it, and the solar budget impact will increase.
Eventually, it may become necessary to radiate waste heat away from the Earth with a maser or other technology. Possibly some kind of exchanger could be built to cycle waste heat back into the power grid.
An alternative to direct beaming of space-collected energy, by the way, is to covert the energy to some highly enriched form in space and re-enter fuel cells into the atmosphere for use down here. The ultimate example would be anti-matter, which could be fabricated off-Earth and chuted in for transport to power plants.
What matters about AOL adopting Mozilla is not that IE would somehow lose its majority share, but that a non-IE browser would subtend an important enough fraction of visitors that site designers could ill afford to ignore it. The IE-only travesties of today might give way to something approaching a standards compliant Web.
"Ah, another missive from Inspector LeKatz on globalism," Holmes said, languidly tossing the afternoon Slashdot on the table.
"Fetch our ski-masks, Watson - the game's afoot!"
Regardless of the merits of the copy protection schemes used, one change that MUST be made by software and hardware manufacturers is to "survive" the insertion of a copy-protected CD in a more robust way. Firmware and persistent OS settings should not be affected, and crashes should be prevented.
The nuisance factor of this "behavior on insertion" problem is currently minimized because so few albums have copy protection schemes. Before very long, most or all major label releases will carry some kind of copy protection. If the industry doesn't harden its drivers and OS's, chaos will result.
By the way, when CD copy protection is the norm, clever people with EAC and similar programs will still be able to rip, but Joe Casual User with his "Automatically rip as you play" pre-installed kiddy software won't, which is probably what the RIAA is really aiming for.
If the expiration code itself is open source, then IT would have to expire, at which point it would no longer be able to expire the package it's embedded in!
I feel shaken, but not stirred.
The value of a search engine lies in its ability to return usable results when you are actually looking for something. Most of the "exploits" people are discussing don't affect Google's usefulness as a search engine. (When is the last time you searched for "talentless hack" or, for that matter, "david gallagher"? Only someone already participating in the prank, or curious about it, would even know it existed.) And "Googlewhacking" is the most harmless of all - the only search results it can "affect" are its own, as listed winning word pairs lose their uniqueness at the next crawl. So what?
Google folks are not stupid. If the integrity of searches that people really make is affected, they will change the code.
In the meantime, is it really necessary to squelch every last bit of fun on the Net?
A simple workaround that avoids penalizing content contributors would be to never show an ad (or charge a no-ad pageview) when a user views his own submitted story, journal or comment. You could be generous and extend that to viewing children of the user's own comment.
This page was generated by a Squadron of Cyber Cupids for CmdrTaco and kathleen.
If you are confused about the context of a particular comment, just link back to the love page through the marriage link...
All the best!
Routers.
Scientology links.
Open protocols.
Free music.
Post-9/11 web responses.
Chat hosts and BBS admins.
Ancient packet switchers.
Executive buzzwords.
Open Source.
Online directories.
Cyber greed.
That guy who just fragged you in Wolfenstein.
The Imperial Domain Droids.
Well-meaning POW/MIA industry dupes.
The Hamster Dance.
Paranoid cartoon fantasy diagrams.
War, damnation and hypertext.
Swedish fiber stations.
Statutory IRC.
Beepstalkers.
Geeks.
The "Heart of the Net" was always a fiction for maroons like Katz to bloviate about. Nothing has changed in that regard.
The Net does not need a heart and does not have one.
It does have a cloaca, and you've just surfed there.
Or is A.I. yet another overhyped, self-serving fantasy by deluded scientists and technocrats talking mostly to one another, foisting their ill-conceived, poorly-engineered creations on an unsuspecting public?
I do like that "yet another." Perhaps Jon would care to list the previous overhyped, self-serving fantasies from deluded scientists, etc?
This is precisely correct. Computers will never be considered to have human intelligence, because we will ADJUST the definition of intelligence, as necessary, to ensure that it always lies beyond what machines have been made to do.
A few hundred years from now there will be a machine that can beat you in tennis, write a novel, win a beauty contest, and raise your child -- and our descendants will absolutely agree that it is not really intelligent.
> Fraunhofer Professional MP3 codec at 64kbps...How much does that cost?
Um, it costs the same for everything except a couple of very high bit rates. I think the current price from Opticom is $50 for "Advanced Plus" and $200 for "Professional." Also as I said, I use it at 56kbps, not 64kbps. Compared to the other expenses of running a streaming station, that part is trivial.
I encode acoustic music at 56kbps for an Internet station. I have carefully evaluated all available encoders at that rate (or as close to it as their UI's will allow me to get), because I want the best sound for my bandwidth. Nothing beats the Fraunhofer Professional MP3 codec at these rates. I can achieve FM quality at 1-1.5mb per song. When I try the same thing with Ogg it sounds washed-out and fuzzy.
I wish the Ogg Vorbis people well, but from an acoustic standpoint they are not yet an option for me.
Remember the Golden Rule of the net: "Be conservative in what you send and liberal in what you accept."
The proper Net approach in my view would be to promulgate as much free software as possible that (a) converts Word to something else on input if you like, and (b) makes it easy to create and attach free-format documents to all the popular MUA's.
Browbeating other users with "I refuse to read that, send it differently" replies is rude and counterproductive.
If editors can moderate our posts without triggering the email notification, that's wrong, I didn't know it, and I apologize & agree they should fix it.
Chris's signature reads:
/.'ers, and Chris isn't set up for direct messaging.
"Why aren't we told when editors moderate our posts?"
But we ARE told, or can be told, when people moderate or follow up to one of our postings, as well as several other events of interest.
Just go Preferences -> Messaging -> Message Preferences. You can get email or Web notification.
Probably Chris set up this signature before that feature was added, but it's misleading now.
I admit this is offtopic for the current thread, but this is very useful info for
I will nominate: Bottleneck (the Bottlenose)