They are trying to content that the auto-editing scripts are making money of their DVDs without permission. In the RIAA and MPAA view you can't make money in any manor in any way whatsoever off their work without their say so.
The movie industry is fighting this tooth and nail. Something about destroying the directors vision or some junk. Don't expect DVDs to come with this standard.
Capitalism: An economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately or corporately owned and development is proportionate to the accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a free market. (Dictionary.com)
Nowhere does capitalism define property as the "most important". In Libertarian style capitalism in fact in defines your rights as the most important. Right of property being one of those rights of course, but equality so are all the other rights.
Actually no you have to have a subscription to even get the auto airbag call. The only thing that you can do without a subscription is sign up for a subscription so I guess in an emergency this can be done, but difficult to say the least.
What would be intesting would be given knowledge of the hash for each 1KB segment and the filetype, to generate an appropriate output for that filetype given lots of computing time. An mp3 for example the computer could crank through random generated mp3 valid data untill it matched one of a list of all the hashs in a file. Then slowly put it together, sure most of the music would be wrong, but a percent of it would be the original intented music. Could create some interesting random music given enough time for the computations (a long freaken time)
Its possible that they are simply colliding small bits of the file. Such that when your downloading different chunks of the same file from multiple people some of these chunks can be scambled with junk data, thus destroying your file. Of course all these programs would need to do is implement a stronger hash.
Well as I stated in another posting, the mix of autopilot and manual driving is really whats keeping computer driven cars off the streets today. Using technology available today autopilot cars could be built that never have accidents (baring mechanical failure and animals/pedestrians) because they could be in constant communicaiton with eachother and all follow the rules at all times. With airtravel we have the opportunity to start right off the bat with an autopilot only system (barring existing planes which could easily be accomidated for because of the extensive pilot training and limited numbers). Then you need some system that keeps you from flying when there are mechanical problems, thats going to be the really tough one is building an airplane that needs limited maintance.
Your right, I wonder if any hackers have been charged with murder before (when it was unintentional of course). I wouldn't put it past some prosecutor trying to make an example
Yes, but Dell runs a very small profit from each item at sells at very high numbers. It also doesn't have a website. Dell is more akin to a manufacturer who sells direct than it is to a retailer. Manufacturers often have to make extensive cost analysis when they start selling any new products or lines. While retailers can try new things out without as much risk.
Yes, but then you have people being charged for murder when their modifications cause crashs. It would only take a few examples for people to stop modding. What would be interesitng of course would be seeing mods meet in remote areas to test their mods unmanned. You know they would do it too.
Well its pretty much in universal agreement that flying cars in mass will be completly autopilot. One of the main problems with autopilot cars is that you would still have a lot of non autopilot dumbasses. With flying cars that transition problem will be mute. Of course all flying cars will have to run on the same rules and communicaiton system. But it should work just fine assuming you don't get hackers trying to change thier autopilot and break the rules.
I didn't say it was as complete, but generally he same idea as they are both GUI APIs. Or does cocoa/carbon provide some sort of mystical thing never heard of.
Hold on, yes I did not RTFA, but either way from what I've seen he states that. 1. No matter how to package and pretty up Linux it will never be a contender. 2. OS X could possibly be a contender.
Does he not realize that OS X is simply a packaged up pretty version of BSD, which is almost identical besides licensing to Linux. Now given Apple does have the ability to give OSX a boost that no distrubution could match, but thats more about corperate backing, something of which IBM could potentially do with Linux, if it decided to.
Wow, that would be interesting, to see IBM come out with an operating system marketed towards buisnesses, but based on Linux! Linux use would explode. What is that you say? They are already doing that? Oh nevermind
PS: Yes I know IBM isn't marketing as hard as apple, but the future potential for them to do that is definatly there.
There are several photocopies and digital copies that are floating around (even someoen ebaying a PDF version for 50 bucks, and he has bidders..??) So all evidence won't be completly destroyed.
Slashdot Mirror
Working together to create a standard definatly isn't collusion. Working together to set prices is.
I mean contend not content.
They are trying to content that the auto-editing scripts are making money of their DVDs without permission. In the RIAA and MPAA view you can't make money in any manor in any way whatsoever off their work without their say so.
The movie industry is fighting this tooth and nail. Something about destroying the directors vision or some junk. Don't expect DVDs to come with this standard.
Please provide some evidence of this please, I can find none.
Capitalism: An economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately or corporately owned and development is proportionate to the accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a free market. (Dictionary.com)
Nowhere does capitalism define property as the "most important". In Libertarian style capitalism in fact in defines your rights as the most important. Right of property being one of those rights of course, but equality so are all the other rights.
Actually improvements to an existing system are definatly patentable. You arn't patenting the new system you are patenting your improvements.
Actually no you have to have a subscription to even get the auto airbag call. The only thing that you can do without a subscription is sign up for a subscription so I guess in an emergency this can be done, but difficult to say the least.
Or it could be "price of buying either seperately" I can see how either can be mistranlated a lot easier than more.
You have no idea just how small a nm is do you?
Either way the 130mm figure is diameter meaning the width of the disc not the thickness.
What would be intesting would be given knowledge of the hash for each 1KB segment and the filetype, to generate an appropriate output for that filetype given lots of computing time. An mp3 for example the computer could crank through random generated mp3 valid data untill it matched one of a list of all the hashs in a file. Then slowly put it together, sure most of the music would be wrong, but a percent of it would be the original intented music. Could create some interesting random music given enough time for the computations (a long freaken time)
Its possible that they are simply colliding small bits of the file. Such that when your downloading different chunks of the same file from multiple people some of these chunks can be scambled with junk data, thus destroying your file. Of course all these programs would need to do is implement a stronger hash.
Well hacking into a radar tower probably is a federal crime. Would this turn it into murder?
Well as I stated in another posting, the mix of autopilot and manual driving is really whats keeping computer driven cars off the streets today. Using technology available today autopilot cars could be built that never have accidents (baring mechanical failure and animals/pedestrians) because they could be in constant communicaiton with eachother and all follow the rules at all times. With airtravel we have the opportunity to start right off the bat with an autopilot only system (barring existing planes which could easily be accomidated for because of the extensive pilot training and limited numbers). Then you need some system that keeps you from flying when there are mechanical problems, thats going to be the really tough one is building an airplane that needs limited maintance.
Your right, I wonder if any hackers have been charged with murder before (when it was unintentional of course). I wouldn't put it past some prosecutor trying to make an example
Yes, but Dell runs a very small profit from each item at sells at very high numbers. It also doesn't have a website. Dell is more akin to a manufacturer who sells direct than it is to a retailer. Manufacturers often have to make extensive cost analysis when they start selling any new products or lines. While retailers can try new things out without as much risk.
Yes, but then you have people being charged for murder when their modifications cause crashs. It would only take a few examples for people to stop modding. What would be interesitng of course would be seeing mods meet in remote areas to test their mods unmanned. You know they would do it too.
Well its pretty much in universal agreement that flying cars in mass will be completly autopilot. One of the main problems with autopilot cars is that you would still have a lot of non autopilot dumbasses. With flying cars that transition problem will be mute. Of course all flying cars will have to run on the same rules and communicaiton system. But it should work just fine assuming you don't get hackers trying to change thier autopilot and break the rules.
Wow, I never noticed. Gonna have to check it out. Wish there was an online version.
I didn't say it was as complete, but generally he same idea as they are both GUI APIs. Or does cocoa/carbon provide some sort of mystical thing never heard of.
Isn't Cocoa/Carbon the same as GNOME or KDE. Its not something impossible in the linux world exactly.
OS X is to BSH what KDE is to LINUX.
OS X is a window manager and graphic library, not an operating system.
Hold on, yes I did not RTFA, but either way from what I've seen he states that.
1. No matter how to package and pretty up Linux it will never be a contender.
2. OS X could possibly be a contender.
Does he not realize that OS X is simply a packaged up pretty version of BSD, which is almost identical besides licensing to Linux. Now given Apple does have the ability to give OSX a boost that no distrubution could match, but thats more about corperate backing, something of which IBM could potentially do with Linux, if it decided to.
Wow, that would be interesting, to see IBM come out with an operating system marketed towards buisnesses, but based on Linux! Linux use would explode. What is that you say? They are already doing that? Oh nevermind
PS: Yes I know IBM isn't marketing as hard as apple, but the future potential for them to do that is definatly there.
Their plan is already working better than expected, if they've got you tricked...
Hey buddy, I think your should know, I'm really easy to trick. So its not much of a feat!
There are several photocopies and digital copies that are floating around (even someoen ebaying a PDF version for 50 bucks, and he has bidders..??) So all evidence won't be completly destroyed.