I'm using XP at work to test our software on. Let me state that XP offers VERY FEW stability or power enhancements over Win2K. The added "features" are purely user interface enhancements, which translates into sluggish performance. It's included firewall is weak (allows microsoft programs full access, so anyone can easily write a trojan that works as an explorer plugin)
As a developer, I've turned off all the user interface enhancements (fading menus, animations, anti-aliasing, etc) for optimal performance, and the result is, a slightly slower Win2000.
Furthermore, the biggest turnoff from XP is that it "calls home". Turn on Zone Alarm or Tiny Personal Firewall, and watch while screensavers try to connect to microsoft.com. Why? I don't know, presumably to send information about the system.
Win2000 is a rock-solid OS; It's stable, easy-to-use, looks good, and most importantly it's fast. XP looks a little nicer, runs a lot slower, and calls home; don't use it if you prefer speed or anonymity.
One record company executive fumed, ``For the past five years, this industry has been endlessly investigated by the government. They find nothing. And it costs us a fortune.'' The executive, speaking on condition of anonymity, added, ``It's a handy whipping boy.''
Hmmm, I think you could replace record with software and government with BSA and it'd still be factually correct.
So I wonder how it feels to be on the other side of the fence this time?
If the populace could be convinced to buy their CDs from other outlets (direct, or online) and was not deluged with target marketed, formulated-to-sell crap (Brittney, Boy Bands, and Limp Bizket Sound-Alikes), there would be hope.
You're right, and that's what they're worried about. Napster made music available through other means. (Some) artists dislike Napster for good reason, because they're not making any money out of it. However, many well-known artists (ie: Courtney Love, Rage Against The Machine, etc) have no problem with Napster/music sharing, as well as a number of local bands. However, for them the issue is can they get compensated for their work. The RIAA understands that the internet is decentralized, low-cost, and that if online music distribution (as a profitable business) was to become a reality, there SOL; and that's why the RIAA is ferociously against reselling off the internet.
Though I'm sure this is all pointless since I'm pretty much preaching to the choir...
CDs do not come with a EULA of any kind however. They do not say what my rights are and are not. I would assume I have a "right" to make a copy for backup purposes. I suppose Sony could sell me a CD saying "No, you don't have the right to make a copy of this", as if I buy the CD I agree to the terms.
You don't have the right just because you assume. Legally you don't have the right to copy a CD unless they explicitly give you permission, as often done on computer CDs.
Yes, you have the right to make a copy due to fair use; however, fair use does not guarantee any degree of quality, it just says you have the right to make a copy, and you can still make an analog copy to tape.
This is what came up earlier regarding copying DVDs and CDs.
...(since I haven't been told otherwise and as I pointed out is a right I have in similar media)... Just because a similar media gives you the right doesn't mean all creations of the same media offer the same right; again never assume.
Why? because there's no problems with either company being too big. Imagine trying to take AOL or Microsoft to court regarding the GPL, simply because they've got the money to hire good lawyers and "convince" the judge they were correct.
However, in a case like this, where both companies are pretty much equal, the judge will be more apt to look at the case fairly.
Granted, the GPL may not even come up in this case, as it's not the primary charge, but even still....
written anything about this in the major newspapers/news shows? (I don't mean news shows on the web, I mean CNN, NBC, ABC, FOXNews, on TV; I mean the New York Times, USA Today, Washington Post, and other local and national newspapers in print)
Usually reporters are more than willing to be the first to post a story, why none here? I'm sure there are reporters who are reading Slashdot; if so, can you please reply on why your newspaper hasn't run any stories and/or if there has been any actiion by the Feds "convincing" you to not post any stories, or is it fear of gaining federal attention.
I know in my case, I've considered writing a letter to the editor regarding the DMCA and the resulting issues. However, I am definitely -not- a model citizen, and am afraid to gain attention by the FBI, and so I've kept my mouth shut, though as sson as I have the money, I'm going to try giving out flyers and such.
But regardless, if anybody out there has any *real* info on WHY the media isn't covering the case of Dmitry Skylarov or the DMCA, please inform us; I'm sure the/. community would like to know.
What's going to happen to Bleem! ?
That was one program that would've been definitely illegal under the DMCA, yet they won the court case against Sony. So what happens there?
SENATORS READ PORNO MAGAZINES!
They must be distributing it to our children! They are corrupting our society! They have ruiuned our economies! Think of the children! The CHILDREN, for Christ's sake! They read porn, so they must have brought DRUGS, and HACKING, and FREE THINKING into our society!
The schools aren't doing a great job (at least here in the US) so why not let the children learn from the internet.
1) They'll learn about anatomy, and will do better in class in their older years.
2) They'll learn geometry, by trying to figure out what kind of body parts can fit into the goats' ear.
3) They'll learn organizational skills, by creating a collection of celbrity porn, indexed by type of celebrity, last name, and real or fake.
and it just goes on....
i knew it, the government just doesn't want us to learn. Let's go on strike!
i work for a company that makes monitoring software.
My job: go on the internet, go to lots of sites, talk to people on AIM, ICQ, etc. read and write lots of email
and all i have to do is make sure everything gets recorded.
lovin every minute of it;)
Bryce conducted her research by visiting gamers, usually during regional or national competitions around England, and administering a series of psychological tests and questionnaires to nearly 100 of them. The results were then compared with those from similiar tests of athletes and others.
I'm a gamer, yet I can barely walk straight. I have no hand-eye coordination, and few athletic skills. But I am a gamer, and not a very good one.
Her choice of subjects completely screws up the experiment. That's like going to the Olympics, and using data to claim that the average mile can be run in 3 minutes.
Yeah, average for Olympians, and that's makes up about 5% of society.
---
Furthermore, being athletic doesn't make you a jock. Being obsessed with sports and having no intelligence whatsoever makes you a jock. I know a damn well large number of people that could probably be very good at any sport they played, but the don't. Just because certain people have certain traits, doesn't mean they fall into a group of people who often also have the same traits.
Nobody's -forcing- you to use Kylix. You use Kylix becuase it's probably it bit easier to program for, and it'll be easier to port user-interfaced programs from Linux to Windows (FWIK, Kylix and Delphi are -very- similar)
So what if the Kylix environment isn't GPL'ed? Nobody's forcing you to use it. However, they are offering it for free if you create GPL'ed software, most likely to
1) lower your costs, and
2) as th article said, get a wider customer base.
However, when the CD player is extracting the audio data digitally, it ignores the error-correction bits (it doesn't even send them on, it just discards them) due to some brain-deadness on the part of CD-player designers.
Yes, and no. The player can't send the exact data, but it does notify the software that it's a bad bit. EAC works by reading the CD multiple times and comparing each read with the other. When certaing bits don't match, it continues reading that portion of the CD numerous times, until it can best replay the intended sound. I'm sure the code would have to be slightly modified for these cds, but not by much. All they have to do is interpolate when they notice a bad bit.
CloneCD also works in a simlar manner. When it receives a bad bit, it writes a 0. It -knows- that bit was bad, but in the case of data, there's not much interpolation you can do.
Audio flows fairly well, and given the music at each side of a certain point, you can generally determine the intended sound. Sure, it won't be perfect, but it -will- be good enough that most people won't notice. Use CoolEdit or SoundForge and you may even be able to remove any noticeable effect that's left.
very interesting read....but again, it can be defeated.
The article mentioned
1) using an analog output
2) using a SP/DIF digital (error-corrected) output...which I assum is only available in high-end players
However, all this means is that software will be able to emulate the DA (Digital -> Analog) converter. Take EAC (Exact Audio Copy - by far the best ripper) and add another option...to error-correct samples itself.
Anything in hardware can be emulated in software; I give it one month at most, before somebody "fixes" the problem.
I wouldn't normally expect things like this to hit the mainstream newspapers. I haven't seen then in my newspaper here.
HOWEVER, when there's actual protests (as was in New York) that often hits the news (granted, not always, as in the Seattle conference) but often it does, and that's probably what convinced Adobe to get off his case.
if Russia and the US went to war over the arrest of Dmitry.
Americans: Damn you Russians, and your lack of copyright enforcement. You guys are hurting our peop...err..corporations.
Russians: Damn you Americans, what the hell else do you expect us to do? There's nothing else here in Russia!
Americans: Yeah, well that's not a good enough excuse.
Russians: Actually, we thought of something we can do.
Americans: Great!
Russians: [Go release nuclear weapon.]
It'd make the world a much better place. Granted, I'd be dead, but so would the majority of the world's lawyers.
He gave the example of:
If you have a letter you don't want anybody to read, and you put it into a safe, and hide it in New York, that's not security; that obscurity. You're hoping that they (your enemies) won't find the safe.
However, if you give crackers the safe and a diagram of the lock, and they still can't figure out a way to lockpick it, then that's security.
However, hiding the safe in New York in addition to securing it doesn't hurt at all. It just takes them longer to find it.
The primary reason people don't steal things randomly is because they don't want to get arrested. Yes, some people have morals, most of society -doesn't-. (Yes, I look down on my fellow man.)
As soon as it becomes commonplace (as if it hasn't) to censor any "subversive" behavior, any intelligent thinking, and any questioning of various standards (ie: PDF security), even for truly and purely intellectual reasons,... as soon as that happens, people will became to accept and believe in the law. Right now, we still have a taste of freedom, and so we fight the lawas, as it's civil injustice. What about in another 10 years? Sure some people will still fight; the majority will just accept it.
Don't get me wrong, I am not saying we should stop fighting. But trying to make a law to demand security won't work, because many people still believe in "security through obfuscation", and in that case it becomes a matter of either perspective or time. (The Vigenier cipher was considered unbreakable in its time, now..well it'll take a few moments).
We should push this, but more importantly continue fighting (and more aggresively) for the repealment of the DMCA. If the DMCA stands, a pressure for security will have absolutely no effect.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm using XP at work to test our software on. Let me state that XP offers VERY FEW stability or power enhancements over Win2K. The added "features" are purely user interface enhancements, which translates into sluggish performance. It's included firewall is weak (allows microsoft programs full access, so anyone can easily write a trojan that works as an explorer plugin)
As a developer, I've turned off all the user interface enhancements (fading menus, animations, anti-aliasing, etc) for optimal performance, and the result is, a slightly slower Win2000.
Furthermore, the biggest turnoff from XP is that it "calls home". Turn on Zone Alarm or Tiny Personal Firewall, and watch while screensavers try to connect to microsoft.com. Why? I don't know, presumably to send information about the system.
Win2000 is a rock-solid OS; It's stable, easy-to-use, looks good, and most importantly it's fast. XP looks a little nicer, runs a lot slower, and calls home; don't use it if you prefer speed or anonymity.
One record company executive fumed, ``For the past five years, this industry has been endlessly investigated by the government. They find nothing. And it costs us a fortune.'' The executive, speaking on condition of anonymity, added, ``It's a handy whipping boy.''
Hmmm, I think you could replace record with software and government with BSA and it'd still be factually correct.
So I wonder how it feels to be on the other side of the fence this time?
If the populace could be convinced to buy their CDs from other outlets (direct, or online) and was not deluged with target marketed, formulated-to-sell crap (Brittney, Boy Bands, and Limp Bizket Sound-Alikes), there would be hope.
You're right, and that's what they're worried about. Napster made music available through other means. (Some) artists dislike Napster for good reason, because they're not making any money out of it. However, many well-known artists (ie: Courtney Love, Rage Against The Machine, etc) have no problem with Napster/music sharing, as well as a number of local bands. However, for them the issue is can they get compensated for their work. The RIAA understands that the internet is decentralized, low-cost, and that if online music distribution (as a profitable business) was to become a reality, there SOL; and that's why the RIAA is ferociously against reselling off the internet.
Though I'm sure this is all pointless since I'm pretty much preaching to the choir...
isn't it a bit obvious there's a communication problem when the RIAA and the artists they represent vehemently oppose each others' beliefs?
should be a sign...
CDs do not come with a EULA of any kind however. They do not say what my rights are and are not. I would assume I have a "right" to make a copy for backup purposes. I suppose Sony could sell me a CD saying "No, you don't have the right to make a copy of this", as if I buy the CD I agree to the terms.
...(since I haven't been told otherwise and as I pointed out is a right I have in similar media)...
You don't have the right just because you assume. Legally you don't have the right to copy a CD unless they explicitly give you permission, as often done on computer CDs.
Yes, you have the right to make a copy due to fair use; however, fair use does not guarantee any degree of quality, it just says you have the right to make a copy, and you can still make an analog copy to tape.
This is what came up earlier regarding copying DVDs and CDs.
Just because a similar media gives you the right doesn't mean all creations of the same media offer the same right; again never assume.
to test the GPL on.
Why? because there's no problems with either company being too big. Imagine trying to take AOL or Microsoft to court regarding the GPL, simply because they've got the money to hire good lawyers and "convince" the judge they were correct.
However, in a case like this, where both companies are pretty much equal, the judge will be more apt to look at the case fairly.
Granted, the GPL may not even come up in this case, as it's not the primary charge, but even still....
that's my penny's worth...
written anything about this in the major newspapers/news shows? (I don't mean news shows on the web, I mean CNN, NBC, ABC, FOXNews, on TV; I mean the New York Times, USA Today, Washington Post, and other local and national newspapers in print)
/. community would like to know.
Usually reporters are more than willing to be the first to post a story, why none here? I'm sure there are reporters who are reading Slashdot; if so, can you please reply on why your newspaper hasn't run any stories and/or if there has been any actiion by the Feds "convincing" you to not post any stories, or is it fear of gaining federal attention.
I know in my case, I've considered writing a letter to the editor regarding the DMCA and the resulting issues. However, I am definitely -not- a model citizen, and am afraid to gain attention by the FBI, and so I've kept my mouth shut, though as sson as I have the money, I'm going to try giving out flyers and such.
But regardless, if anybody out there has any *real* info on WHY the media isn't covering the case of Dmitry Skylarov or the DMCA, please inform us; I'm sure the
Thanks
The hypothetical "cell phone running Linux" might not stay hypothetical very long.
No, but the "Linux spreads a virus" will become true as soon as soon as the companies admit that cell phones cause brain cancer.
It's a conpiracy, I tell ya!
thanks for moderating me up, but what i really wanted was some replies...
anybody have any ideas?
What's going to happen to Bleem! ? That was one program that would've been definitely illegal under the DMCA, yet they won the court case against Sony. So what happens there?
Just admit it everyone: you like porn, and porn is good for you if taken in moderation. How many marriages has it saved? Bahahaha.
Moderation? The hell with moderation. What kind of man are you anyways.
Napster Bad, PORN GOO-OOD!
'nuff said.
SENATORS READ PORNO MAGAZINES!
They must be distributing it to our children! They are corrupting our society! They have ruiuned our economies! Think of the children! The CHILDREN, for Christ's sake! They read porn, so they must have brought DRUGS, and HACKING, and FREE THINKING into our society!
We must BAN all senators!
The schools aren't doing a great job (at least here in the US) so why not let the children learn from the internet.
1) They'll learn about anatomy, and will do better in class in their older years.
2) They'll learn geometry, by trying to figure out what kind of body parts can fit into the goats' ear.
3) They'll learn organizational skills, by creating a collection of celbrity porn, indexed by type of celebrity, last name, and real or fake.
and it just goes on....
i knew it, the government just doesn't want us to learn. Let's go on strike!
i work for a company that makes monitoring software. My job: go on the internet, go to lots of sites, talk to people on AIM, ICQ, etc. read and write lots of email and all i have to do is make sure everything gets recorded. lovin every minute of it ;)
Bryce conducted her research by visiting gamers, usually during regional or national competitions around England, and administering a series of psychological tests and questionnaires to nearly 100 of them. The results were then compared with those from similiar tests of athletes and others.
I'm a gamer, yet I can barely walk straight. I have no hand-eye coordination, and few athletic skills. But I am a gamer, and not a very good one.
Her choice of subjects completely screws up the experiment. That's like going to the Olympics, and using data to claim that the average mile can be run in 3 minutes.
Yeah, average for Olympians, and that's makes up about 5% of society.
---
Furthermore, being athletic doesn't make you a jock. Being obsessed with sports and having no intelligence whatsoever makes you a jock. I know a damn well large number of people that could probably be very good at any sport they played, but the don't. Just because certain people have certain traits, doesn't mean they fall into a group of people who often also have the same traits.
Call the BSA
Nobody's -forcing- you to use Kylix. You use Kylix becuase it's probably it bit easier to program for, and it'll be easier to port user-interfaced programs from Linux to Windows (FWIK, Kylix and Delphi are -very- similar) So what if the Kylix environment isn't GPL'ed? Nobody's forcing you to use it. However, they are offering it for free if you create GPL'ed software, most likely to 1) lower your costs, and 2) as th article said, get a wider customer base.
However, when the CD player is extracting the audio data digitally, it ignores the error-correction bits (it doesn't even send them on, it just discards them) due to some brain-deadness on the part of CD-player designers.
Yes, and no. The player can't send the exact data, but it does notify the software that it's a bad bit. EAC works by reading the CD multiple times and comparing each read with the other. When certaing bits don't match, it continues reading that portion of the CD numerous times, until it can best replay the intended sound. I'm sure the code would have to be slightly modified for these cds, but not by much. All they have to do is interpolate when they notice a bad bit.
CloneCD also works in a simlar manner. When it receives a bad bit, it writes a 0. It -knows- that bit was bad, but in the case of data, there's not much interpolation you can do.
Audio flows fairly well, and given the music at each side of a certain point, you can generally determine the intended sound. Sure, it won't be perfect, but it -will- be good enough that most people won't notice. Use CoolEdit or SoundForge and you may even be able to remove any noticeable effect that's left.
very interesting read....but again, it can be defeated. The article mentioned 1) using an analog output 2) using a SP/DIF digital (error-corrected) output...which I assum is only available in high-end players However, all this means is that software will be able to emulate the DA (Digital -> Analog) converter. Take EAC (Exact Audio Copy - by far the best ripper) and add another option...to error-correct samples itself. Anything in hardware can be emulated in software; I give it one month at most, before somebody "fixes" the problem.
I wouldn't normally expect things like this to hit the mainstream newspapers. I haven't seen then in my newspaper here.
HOWEVER, when there's actual protests (as was in New York) that often hits the news (granted, not always, as in the Seattle conference) but often it does, and that's probably what convinced Adobe to get off his case.
just my pointless rambling...
this be fucking hilarious....
if Russia and the US went to war over the arrest of Dmitry.
Americans: Damn you Russians, and your lack of copyright enforcement. You guys are hurting our peop...err..corporations.
Russians: Damn you Americans, what the hell else do you expect us to do? There's nothing else here in Russia!
Americans: Yeah, well that's not a good enough excuse.
Russians: Actually, we thought of something we can do.
Americans: Great!
Russians: [Go release nuclear weapon.]
It'd make the world a much better place. Granted, I'd be dead, but so would the majority of the world's lawyers.
in Applied Cryptography...
He gave the example of:
If you have a letter you don't want anybody to read, and you put it into a safe, and hide it in New York, that's not security; that obscurity. You're hoping that they (your enemies) won't find the safe.
However, if you give crackers the safe and a diagram of the lock, and they still can't figure out a way to lockpick it, then that's security.
However, hiding the safe in New York in addition to securing it doesn't hurt at all. It just takes them longer to find it.
By playing Unreal Tournament, the next time I go on a hihg-school rampage, I've got a less likely chance to get shot by the cops.
Or wait, bad analogy. Here's a better one:
The next time some crazed maniac goes on a high-school rampage, I'll be more able to escape the gunfire...
but won't work, once the DMCA is in wide use.
... as soon as that happens, people will became to accept and believe in the law. Right now, we still have a taste of freedom, and so we fight the lawas, as it's civil injustice. What about in another 10 years? Sure some people will still fight; the majority will just accept it.
The primary reason people don't steal things randomly is because they don't want to get arrested. Yes, some people have morals, most of society -doesn't-. (Yes, I look down on my fellow man.)
As soon as it becomes commonplace (as if it hasn't) to censor any "subversive" behavior, any intelligent thinking, and any questioning of various standards (ie: PDF security), even for truly and purely intellectual reasons,
Don't get me wrong, I am not saying we should stop fighting. But trying to make a law to demand security won't work, because many people still believe in "security through obfuscation", and in that case it becomes a matter of either perspective or time. (The Vigenier cipher was considered unbreakable in its time, now..well it'll take a few moments).
We should push this, but more importantly continue fighting (and more aggresively) for the repealment of the DMCA. If the DMCA stands, a pressure for security will have absolutely no effect.
My penny's worth....
this comment