What I feel is more important then the GPL in the SCO/IBM case whether or not SCO can freely distribute code either by free ftp or actual sales, then choose to charge licenses after the code is distributed.
The implications of this are far reaching esp for typical software where money is exchanged. To me, it's like Toyota asking me for extra money for driving my old 1979 360,000 miles when they expected me as a consumer to buy a diffrent car after only 100,000 miles.
"...constantly being taken offline by his parents..... due to power useage"
Power supply is rated for up to 400watts of consumption. If your PC was actually consuming 400watts of power, you'd feel the heat. I have some old sun equipment that actually does consume that much power, and it did a nice job of heating the computer room in the winter.
If the parents are concerned about power consumption, then turn off a freaking light! Chances are your PC power consumption is roughly equal to 1 or 2 100watt light bulbs at most.
If they can see their power meter... it would be rather easy to note the kw/hr consumption with the computer, and without the computer.
This to me sounds wonderful! I mean... if a Ford can only use Ford tagged tires, and if this are radio tags... it sounds like... to me, that you can disable any car you choose just by broadcasting the wrong information.
Law enforcement would have another tool at their disposal, and we can have that brave new world that we've been dreaming of.
Not only do I object to being forced to buy a multi-purpose part from a specific company who doesn't even make the part, but it seems to me that you create yet another way your car can break down. I have this mental image of military people pushing their cars off-base because their personal cars won't operate due to their extensive use of radar.
The funny thing about firmware is the fact that it is, in most cases, physicaly attached to a device and when physicaly moved, the firmware physicaly goes with it... fancy that.
MSN's adsl service for example issued out arescom modems which included firmware that can't easily be updated by the end user, and the company doesn't give out firmware for MSN tagged modems. In my region it limits their usefulness pretty much to PPPoA based service, and near as I can tell while using NAT, are limited to only allowing one device behind the NAT. While freaking stupid, I can not trully argue with this as the end user bought the modem this way, it's not like they have special rights to diffrent firmware. Bought a dsl modem with crappy firmware...that's what you are doomed to have for life.
It has always been my belief that when you sell a device... the firmware goes with it. Nice company provide updates freely, but near as I'm aware are by no means obligated to. Unless it is physicaly removed, it's yours. I can not believe that our legal system would permit, for example, selling of a used telivision that requires extra money to operate.
SCO has come up with a FAQ for current and potential users... I believe they say that previous owners of THEIR Linux Distro is exempt from the $699 fee. (Go figure)
I've seen this, yet it's not clear in my mind what is an owner? I got a CD promo... no money exchanged hands. Would I be considered an owner?
I actually have a copy of Caldera somewhere around here, installed on a 486sx laptop no less. I didn't actually buy it, but it was given to me as a promotional item. To me it was like, "Oh hey, don't have to put up with a multi meg download and burning a CD".
As far as useful value to me, it's just a glorified text terminal.
What is SCO's position on Caldera distrobutions? Do they expect me to pay money for a product that they gave me for free? Can someone provide me with a link that has this information?
I'm not trying to beat a dead horse here, I'm actually curious. If there is some form of evidence SCO expects me to pay money for a product that was sent to me in good faith, I think my state attorney general should be informed.
I have to admit, while I did observe a theme here... "I can't get enough" by Depeche Mode off their Speak n' Spell if i'm not mistaken isn't exactly what I consider to be a mainstay of them. Only a real fan or someone who enjoyes the sound of a casio keboard with some nostaliga for commodore 64's would be caught dead with that track, or unless someone wants to use it for a parity of a viagra comercial (I just can't get it up).
Now, what makes it nuts... really nuts.... is would a civil trial... assuming damages are rewarded, would that make these images authorized? Afterall, a judgement in the favor of the plantif would be money exchanged for the distrubtion of images. Would that mean if I bought the image in question it's worth $150,000? Or would I be sued for $150,000 if I sold a copy of this image without permision?
Re:News flash - Bill Gates downplays linux
on
Bill Gates On Linux
·
· Score: 1
Soooo, marketing is outside of the realm of true or false now? Handy!
No, marketing is outside the realm of reality. That's what marketing is! It is not physical, technical, or any other form of specifications. It's not a objective evaluation of what a product actually is and it's fuction in life. Trully good marketing is about subjective fluffy stuff that you can't define in a dicitonary so you can't prove to be true or false, it's about evoking the consumers imagination to make them believe it's the best thing since sliced bread. It's about making a promise that some product is the future and if enough people buy into that fantisy it becomes true. Marketing is about hopes and dreams and selling you a product which you may or may not need.
It's hardly about true or false, those are tangable things. This is why you never take credit in what a business person says about a product being sold. They don't have a clue, why should they, they just sell shit. I feel sorry for people who listen to something Bill Gates says in the same way that I feel sorry for a person who listens to a used car salesman. It's not like they actually know about the car's history, chances are it was just bought at auction, and is so much better that that guy down the road who also buys cars at auction, probally the same auction.
The future is now, this is designed to increase producity, it's the next generation, designed for the real world, great new taste, feel the power, get it now, supplies are limited. Yep, there is not an infinate supply, so better get it now while supplies last. What is it? Could be anything, but that doesn't matter, we need you to buy it. Don't buy that one, ours is better cause we make it better. Automated and customized to meet your present and future needs. Don't delay get it now for christ sake.
All this crap is best ignored...
Re:News flash - Bill Gates downplays linux
on
Bill Gates On Linux
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I feel sorry for people who actually believe Bill Gates. I mean, I'm not saying he's not a creditable source or anything, the fact that he's a business man. His primary intrest is selling a product. When quoted on things like "no one will need more then 640k" was pretty much an accurate statement in 1982 or so. I did just fine on my atari with 64K of ram, steller with 1meg of ram. But times change.
So yea, anyone reading any interview with Bill Gates must remember the fact that he is selling a product. That's his job, that's what he does best. Not nessicarly true or false, just marketing.
As far as linux is concerned, it's in a much more unique position then OS/2. OS/2 is a closed source program, which roughly means as soon as it's no longer profitable to do so, they will not support it. An unsupported closed source product is about as useful as a condom machine in the vatican. Part of the reason I bothered at all with the *nix scene was the fact that some of my hardware was supported under OSS solutions that just didn't get win95 drivers. This I consider to be one of it's strengths, the fact that something contributed by just a small group of people can benifit me.
Even if Linux doesn't achive the level of use that microsoft windows for consumer grade operating systems, I don't think i'd give a shit. I'm not going to be like the OS/2 users out there and become a fanatic just because I have made a choice to use specific software. Works great for me, does it's job well, and so long as it's free i'll use it.
I'm going to actually disagree on the point that prohibition was about religious zelots.
The 18th ammendment, while I diagree with it, paved the way for the 19th ammendment.
Prohibition was in part a law to help combat domestic violence, basicly women who felt that alcohol played a role in domestic violence. It was this movement, though I will still disagree with the 18th ammendment, proved that women have earned the right to be a part of our political process.
Basicly, the 18th ammendment sobered up america just long enough for people to realize that perhaps women voting is a good idea, and promptly after 19th ammendment was passed, it was as if the entire nation showed their approval by saying, "Suffrage for women.... I'll drink to that".
You are most correct it is Vern Buerg's LIST... I have not looked at the help screen for probally, well, probally since like 1990. http://www.buerg.com I believe is the offical site.
I should download a new version of V... I downloaded it once way back when I was hunting for the new version of list. I must admit, list has become slugish in win2k. My only complaint was the fact that it didn't use the stock text modes, something my eyes have become most use to.
But even though list is pretty outdated, i'm still most happy reading a book with it. It's major bonus is the fact that it will indeed work on a 286 laptop.
In case you don't know, there is an ascii edition and a pdf edition of the newest book floating about. While it may be somewhat harder to actually scan in a book, it's far easier to propigate once scanned, esp if it's just ascii. I for one am PERFECTLY happy reading a book using either vanberg's list on the pc, or less under linux. Lets face it, text is easy to compress and faster to transmit.
How could it get in the net so quickly? Well, it may be a 800+ page book, but if the task was divided among let's say 8 people, that's only 100 pages of scanning a piece. Far less daunting task. To be honest, I don't have a clue, but it's there.
Dispite the fact that it's out there, it's still doing well as far as sales go... demonstrating that piracy doesn't nessicarly affect the bottom line. Should we consider p2p an online amature library it a criminal organization bent on doing harm to copyright holders.
So... something that is easier to pirate and reproduce is selling better then "Hulk" [unsure of the correct title], well probally because harry potter is entertaining, and the hulk is just recycled stan lee stuff. I'll admit, I downloaded a copy of "Hulk", but bought a copy of harry potter. I'd rather have bought an ascii edition, but that's not an option presently, not that i'm aware.
Assuming a theft of service of $50 monthly, that would be 8,000,000 people getting their service illegaly.
291,363,272 is the present population if the USA according to www.census.gov. So based on my $50 monthly figure, that's about 3% of america pirating dish services.
[$50 montly based on advertsied price. $39.99 is a special I see advertsied, where I pay $70.00 for cable services presently]
Question... do 3 out of 100 people actually even own the equipment to recieve these services?
No long do businesses have to actually produce products or sell services in order to make money. All you have to do is find a scapegoat to blame for your business model not making money, and have the courts order him to pay you an outlandish sum for the rest of their life.
Wow... this is so cool. This means I can publish a book and sue xerox for producing a product that can copy my book without my permission! Tallent is the thing of the past, I don't even need to produce a good book.
Do they have the right to choose how it is used after it is sold, "first sale" and all?
Fuck no! I would think not anyway. If you want to use your Xbox as a high tech planter, that should be spiffy. If you bought one for someone that never bought any games for it, the microsoft police shouldn't go after you. It's not like there is a contract requiring you to buy media from microsoft. It's their choice to sell it at a loss. The worst they can do to my knowlege is not support shit they don't want to.
The more complex you make the plumbing, the easier it is to stuff up the drain.
!my solution! between three rooms.
Living room amp, with inputs and outputs
5 disk DVD, Digital cable, VCR Kitchen amp, using tape inputs / outputs.
Turn table Computer noock -> living room (audio over cat 5)
Hollywood recorder
cheepo computer speakers. Fileserver downstairs
file share of.mp3 and other media
web server of.mp3 and other media
------------------
If I want to hear shit in the kitchen playing from the living room, I press the tape monitor button, I hear whatever that amp recieves.
If I want to hear vinyl from the kitchen in the living room, I just put the amp in the living room on aux.
If I wish to hear MP3s I have two choices
1. Burn to disk, play on DVD player
2. Turn VCR to aux, play mp3 over analog wire
a> play files from computer nook
b> play files from network -------------
I read this post and it seems like you are making your life too complex with having one PC with several sound cards. That sounds like a pain in the tookus.
If you are wired for cat5, cat5 is adquate for both network and line level audio, though it's probally highly reccomend that you use a seperate run for audio.
If you want cool spiffy pretty much wireless, well then go with standard issue FM stereo transmitter. Not enough range? Well you can use a non used cat5 connnection as an antena to improve reception. FM broadcast through your walls with cat5 would open the door to just using a radio walkman to hear what you want to hear. Existing technology.
Either FM or wire for your transport, it just beocmes a simple matter of having an amp in each room. Doesn't require computers to listen.
----------- But what if you want something to play something diffrent in each room?
File share / http server... both winamp and xmms support this. Simple PC each room, old laptop should be dandy.
----------
Remote control?
If I want to play from my linux box, I just use xmms and export the display to my pc running xserver software. There was a *dos* based player which might work via telnet, it looks a touch blocky but gets the job done. Otherwise there are many solutions that offer wireless control.
I'm sure there are other solution that employ the use of cgi scripts so you can choose via a simple system that will look much more neat, but hey, i'm happy with just xmms displaying on my PC. Works just great for me.
--------------
The brief....
Centralized sound player, have an option to play to all rooms. FM or wire and an amp. Can be implemented for pretty damn low cost.
Centralized media library, choose a selection from a server.
Why should Microsoft allow running Linux on their Xbox?
Microsoft should care because they are selling the xbox at a loss, based under the assumption that buying games will be profitable.
While you may disagree with their business practices, it's their product and they have the right to choose how it is sold. While I think they are missing a bet, as they chould choose to sell the Xbox with a basic linux distro, one designed for basic web browsing and e-mail, it's their choice not to create such a product. Sad really, but it's their choice.
---
As far as buying a $200 e-machine... well I'm not sure they are quite that cheep with deven TV output, and that's the marketable thing about the x-box, is it hooks up to a TV. While you can argue that you can get a video card with TVoutput, that'll take extra cables between your TV and your PC. The X-box is a $200 device that will fit nice into your AV stack. Further more, it's an ethernet device too.
For someone like my self, who would require a 33ft run between my PC and TV, i'd much rather go ethernet then Svideo. Cat5 is cheeper and reading a mpeg / avi file from my PC and playing on the Xbox is a fuck of alot better then a long ass Svideo run. ----
For me, it's not about being l33t geex0r, it's just practical. The x-box would be a useful product if it permited a basic operating system. I can use cheep wires to watch shit on my TV. I can download the required codex to play the media, and not have to worry about buying the approperate media player. It's only common sence... While there are those who don't mind having a PC next to their TV, or having a long ass cable run, there are those of us who just don't have the room nor the desire for implement it.
I'm thinking it doesn't take buckets of money to issue out ciece and desist letters. Signigent yes, but not buckets.
The real danger would be if SCO was permited to contact ISPs and able to shutdown end user's connections based on their belief of unauthorized use of IP. While this may seem somewhat paranoid, it would after all solve the glitch regarding actually taking end users to civil court. SCO after all didn't shut down your connection, your ISP did, your beef would be with them, and chances are you'd have to spend moolah to defend your self to get it turned back on. It is after all, in their mind's eye, a copyright violation.
I have to admit... while I would consider 100mph to be excessive [excepting long 300 mile streches of straight], I would think it's more dangerious to have two or more cars going at that speed.
Now the motorola solution, as in radio ahead and report an excessive speeder, so a trooper can get up to speed *before* the offender screems past, that would be somewhat safer.
---
On a diffrent note, I was in Montana when they had up on the road, "Reasonable and prudent" as the speed limit. While my first responce was, "cool" I considered 75 to be the fastest I would go. This was in the west on i-90 and the pesky mountains got in the way of my need to open up my throttle.
But, look at what they do if you descramble satellite feeds without paying.
Ahh, that's activly *descrambling* the data. That's going above and beyond, theft of services and all that. You need to buy a key of sorts to gain access to these services, unless you are in canada ofcorse.
intentionally taps, or makes any unauthorized connection, whether physically, electrically, acoustically, inductively
I do not claim to be a lawyer, but largly based on what i've observed tap, as in wire tap, only applies to audio tapping. As in, it might very well be legal to pop in a security camera so long as it doesn't pickup audio.
Further more, even the law you quoted implies *authorized access*. I would argue strongly that without basic security mesures that all people *are authorized* to access this material. It would be no diffrent, in my minds anyway, if they put up private information on a public web server, esp if google picks it up seeing no robots file in place.
I would further submit the fact that the service of WiFi netaccess is very much common place. For example, my local starbucks coffee offers WiFi access for a fee, and I know of one CAFE that offers public free WiFi access.
Given that this is a service offered in some establishments, a stumbler who accidently comes across access might reasonably assume that this is a service, given there was no security and *authorized access* is granted to everyone by the WiFi router based on a configeration choice by the system admin. My argument, which may or may not stand up in court, would be that because the system authorizes you that no law was broken, even if access to propriority data was made publicly available to anyone who requested access.
We can clearly agree the school fucked up, but I'd argue that they should be held criminaly liable because their WiFi network specificly grants *authorized access* to anyone. Just because it's an automated authorization system is no excuse in my minds eye, no diffrent then asking for propriority records and getting them by fax from an office worker that wasn't told better.
If it was me personaly, i'd say, "oh cool, public WiFi network, I can check my e-mail from here".
I'm not sure how this would qualify on electronic tresspass. It's one thing to physicaly or electronicly attempt entry, but when the radio waves are not encrypted and pass through you body?
I mean... if for example I had a WiFI card and I was on campus, which I would consider perfectly out of the ordinary, and I tripped upon a network connection, I would think "oh neet public WiFi". Just like if I was walking down the street and saw a path to a lake, "Oh neet a public lake".
My point is without notice, how do you expect people to know it's treaspass? Or on the other hand, without encryption, how do you expect people to know it's private? Without notice of private property, I don't think it's tresspass.
Common sence should rule in cases like this, as for radio reasonable attempts should be made to protect private communications, and if they are intercepted it's your own damn fault.
Slashdot Mirror
What I feel is more important then the GPL in the SCO/IBM case whether or not SCO can freely distribute code either by free ftp or actual sales, then choose to charge licenses after the code is distributed.
The implications of this are far reaching esp for typical software where money is exchanged. To me, it's like Toyota asking me for extra money for driving my old 1979 360,000 miles when they expected me as a consumer to buy a diffrent car after only 100,000 miles.
"...constantly being taken offline by his parents ..... due to power useage"
Power supply is rated for up to 400watts of consumption. If your PC was actually consuming 400watts of power, you'd feel the heat. I have some old sun equipment that actually does consume that much power, and it did a nice job of heating the computer room in the winter.
If the parents are concerned about power consumption, then turn off a freaking light! Chances are your PC power consumption is roughly equal to 1 or 2 100watt light bulbs at most.
If they can see their power meter... it would be rather easy to note the kw/hr consumption with the computer, and without the computer.
This to me sounds wonderful! I mean... if a Ford can only use Ford tagged tires, and if this are radio tags... it sounds like... to me, that you can disable any car you choose just by broadcasting the wrong information.
Law enforcement would have another tool at their disposal, and we can have that brave new world that we've been dreaming of.
Not only do I object to being forced to buy a multi-purpose part from a specific company who doesn't even make the part, but it seems to me that you create yet another way your car can break down. I have this mental image of military people pushing their cars off-base because their personal cars won't operate due to their extensive use of radar.
The funny thing about firmware is the fact that it is, in most cases, physicaly attached to a device and when physicaly moved, the firmware physicaly goes with it... fancy that.
MSN's adsl service for example issued out arescom modems which included firmware that can't easily be updated by the end user, and the company doesn't give out firmware for MSN tagged modems. In my region it limits their usefulness pretty much to PPPoA based service, and near as I can tell while using NAT, are limited to only allowing one device behind the NAT. While freaking stupid, I can not trully argue with this as the end user bought the modem this way, it's not like they have special rights to diffrent firmware. Bought a dsl modem with crappy firmware...that's what you are doomed to have for life.
It has always been my belief that when you sell a device... the firmware goes with it. Nice company provide updates freely, but near as I'm aware are by no means obligated to. Unless it is physicaly removed, it's yours. I can not believe that our legal system would permit, for example, selling of a used telivision that requires extra money to operate.
SCO has come up with a FAQ for current and potential users... I believe they say that previous owners of THEIR Linux Distro is exempt from the $699 fee. (Go figure)
I've seen this, yet it's not clear in my mind what is an owner? I got a CD promo... no money exchanged hands. Would I be considered an owner?
I actually have a copy of Caldera somewhere around here, installed on a 486sx laptop no less. I didn't actually buy it, but it was given to me as a promotional item. To me it was like, "Oh hey, don't have to put up with a multi meg download and burning a CD".
As far as useful value to me, it's just a glorified text terminal.
What is SCO's position on Caldera distrobutions? Do they expect me to pay money for a product that they gave me for free? Can someone provide me with a link that has this information?
I'm not trying to beat a dead horse here, I'm actually curious. If there is some form of evidence SCO expects me to pay money for a product that was sent to me in good faith, I think my state attorney general should be informed.
I have to admit, while I did observe a theme here... "I can't get enough" by Depeche Mode off their Speak n' Spell if i'm not mistaken isn't exactly what I consider to be a mainstay of them. Only a real fan or someone who enjoyes the sound of a casio keboard with some nostaliga for commodore 64's would be caught dead with that track, or unless someone wants to use it for a parity of a viagra comercial (I just can't get it up).
Now, what makes it nuts... really nuts.... is would a civil trial... assuming damages are rewarded, would that make these images authorized? Afterall, a judgement in the favor of the plantif would be money exchanged for the distrubtion of images. Would that mean if I bought the image in question it's worth $150,000? Or would I be sued for $150,000 if I sold a copy of this image without permision?
Soooo, marketing is outside of the realm of true or false now? Handy!
No, marketing is outside the realm of reality. That's what marketing is! It is not physical, technical, or any other form of specifications. It's not a objective evaluation of what a product actually is and it's fuction in life. Trully good marketing is about subjective fluffy stuff that you can't define in a dicitonary so you can't prove to be true or false, it's about evoking the consumers imagination to make them believe it's the best thing since sliced bread. It's about making a promise that some product is the future and if enough people buy into that fantisy it becomes true. Marketing is about hopes and dreams and selling you a product which you may or may not need.
It's hardly about true or false, those are tangable things. This is why you never take credit in what a business person says about a product being sold. They don't have a clue, why should they, they just sell shit. I feel sorry for people who listen to something Bill Gates says in the same way that I feel sorry for a person who listens to a used car salesman. It's not like they actually know about the car's history, chances are it was just bought at auction, and is so much better that that guy down the road who also buys cars at auction, probally the same auction.
The future is now, this is designed to increase producity, it's the next generation, designed for the real world, great new taste, feel the power, get it now, supplies are limited. Yep, there is not an infinate supply, so better get it now while supplies last. What is it? Could be anything, but that doesn't matter, we need you to buy it. Don't buy that one, ours is better cause we make it better. Automated and customized to meet your present and future needs. Don't delay get it now for christ sake.
All this crap is best ignored...
I feel sorry for people who actually believe Bill Gates. I mean, I'm not saying he's not a creditable source or anything, the fact that he's a business man. His primary intrest is selling a product. When quoted on things like "no one will need more then 640k" was pretty much an accurate statement in 1982 or so. I did just fine on my atari with 64K of ram, steller with 1meg of ram. But times change.
So yea, anyone reading any interview with Bill Gates must remember the fact that he is selling a product. That's his job, that's what he does best. Not nessicarly true or false, just marketing.
As far as linux is concerned, it's in a much more unique position then OS/2. OS/2 is a closed source program, which roughly means as soon as it's no longer profitable to do so, they will not support it. An unsupported closed source product is about as useful as a condom machine in the vatican. Part of the reason I bothered at all with the *nix scene was the fact that some of my hardware was supported under OSS solutions that just didn't get win95 drivers. This I consider to be one of it's strengths, the fact that something contributed by just a small group of people can benifit me.
Even if Linux doesn't achive the level of use that microsoft windows for consumer grade operating systems, I don't think i'd give a shit. I'm not going to be like the OS/2 users out there and become a fanatic just because I have made a choice to use specific software. Works great for me, does it's job well, and so long as it's free i'll use it.
I'm going to actually disagree on the point that prohibition was about religious zelots.
The 18th ammendment, while I diagree with it, paved the way for the 19th ammendment.
Prohibition was in part a law to help combat domestic violence, basicly women who felt that alcohol played a role in domestic violence. It was this movement, though I will still disagree with the 18th ammendment, proved that women have earned the right to be a part of our political process.
Basicly, the 18th ammendment sobered up america just long enough for people to realize that perhaps women voting is a good idea, and promptly after 19th ammendment was passed, it was as if the entire nation showed their approval by saying, "Suffrage for women.... I'll drink to that".
You are most correct it is Vern Buerg's LIST... I have not looked at the help screen for probally, well, probally since like 1990. http://www.buerg.com I believe is the offical site.
I should download a new version of V... I downloaded it once way back when I was hunting for the new version of list. I must admit, list has become slugish in win2k. My only complaint was the fact that it didn't use the stock text modes, something my eyes have become most use to.
But even though list is pretty outdated, i'm still most happy reading a book with it. It's major bonus is the fact that it will indeed work on a 286 laptop.
Can we say ebook or PDA?
In case you don't know, there is an ascii edition and a pdf edition of the newest book floating about. While it may be somewhat harder to actually scan in a book, it's far easier to propigate once scanned, esp if it's just ascii. I for one am PERFECTLY happy reading a book using either vanberg's list on the pc, or less under linux. Lets face it, text is easy to compress and faster to transmit.
How could it get in the net so quickly? Well, it may be a 800+ page book, but if the task was divided among let's say 8 people, that's only 100 pages of scanning a piece. Far less daunting task. To be honest, I don't have a clue, but it's there.
Dispite the fact that it's out there, it's still doing well as far as sales go... demonstrating that piracy doesn't nessicarly affect the bottom line. Should we consider p2p an online amature library it a criminal organization bent on doing harm to copyright holders.
So... something that is easier to pirate and reproduce is selling better then "Hulk" [unsure of the correct title], well probally because harry potter is entertaining, and the hulk is just recycled stan lee stuff. I'll admit, I downloaded a copy of "Hulk", but bought a copy of harry potter. I'd rather have bought an ascii edition, but that's not an option presently, not that i'm aware.
It's a crime to circumvent copy protection.
It's not a crime to avoid it, well not yet anyway.
$4 billion a year?
Assuming a theft of service of $50 monthly, that would be 8,000,000 people getting their service illegaly.
291,363,272 is the present population if the USA according to www.census.gov. So based on my $50 monthly figure, that's about 3% of america pirating dish services.
[$50 montly based on advertsied price. $39.99 is a special I see advertsied, where I pay $70.00 for cable services presently]
Question... do 3 out of 100 people actually even own the equipment to recieve these services?
No long do businesses have to actually produce products or sell services in order to make money. All you have to do is find a scapegoat to blame for your business model not making money, and have the courts order him to pay you an outlandish sum for the rest of their life.
Wow... this is so cool. This means I can publish a book and sue xerox for producing a product that can copy my book without my permission! Tallent is the thing of the past, I don't even need to produce a good book.
Do they have the right to choose how it is used after it is sold, "first sale" and all?
Fuck no! I would think not anyway. If you want to use your Xbox as a high tech planter, that should be spiffy. If you bought one for someone that never bought any games for it, the microsoft police shouldn't go after you. It's not like there is a contract requiring you to buy media from microsoft. It's their choice to sell it at a loss. The worst they can do to my knowlege is not support shit they don't want to.
The more complex you make the plumbing, the easier it is to stuff up the drain.
.mp3 and other media .mp3 and other media
!my solution! between three rooms.
Living room amp, with inputs and outputs
5 disk DVD, Digital cable, VCR
Kitchen amp, using tape inputs / outputs.
Turn table
Computer noock -> living room (audio over cat 5)
Hollywood recorder
cheepo computer speakers.
Fileserver downstairs
file share of
web server of
------------------
If I want to hear shit in the kitchen playing from the living room, I press the tape monitor button, I hear whatever that amp recieves.
If I want to hear vinyl from the kitchen in the living room, I just put the amp in the living room on aux.
If I wish to hear MP3s I have two choices
1. Burn to disk, play on DVD player
2. Turn VCR to aux, play mp3 over analog wire
a> play files from computer nook
b> play files from network
-------------
I read this post and it seems like you are making your life too complex with having one PC with several sound cards. That sounds like a pain in the tookus.
If you are wired for cat5, cat5 is adquate for both network and line level audio, though it's probally highly reccomend that you use a seperate run for audio.
If you want cool spiffy pretty much wireless, well then go with standard issue FM stereo transmitter. Not enough range? Well you can use a non used cat5 connnection as an antena to improve reception. FM broadcast through your walls with cat5 would open the door to just using a radio walkman to hear what you want to hear. Existing technology.
Either FM or wire for your transport, it just beocmes a simple matter of having an amp in each room. Doesn't require computers to listen.
-----------
But what if you want something to play something diffrent in each room?
File share / http server... both winamp and xmms support this. Simple PC each room, old laptop should be dandy.
----------
Remote control?
If I want to play from my linux box, I just use xmms and export the display to my pc running xserver software. There was a *dos* based player which might work via telnet, it looks a touch blocky but gets the job done. Otherwise there are many solutions that offer wireless control.
I'm sure there are other solution that employ the use of cgi scripts so you can choose via a simple system that will look much more neat, but hey, i'm happy with just xmms displaying on my PC. Works just great for me.
--------------
The brief....
Centralized sound player, have an option to play to all rooms. FM or wire and an amp. Can be implemented for pretty damn low cost.
Centralized media library, choose a selection from a server.
1. Sell a bootloader for the amount of money needed to break even...
2. ?????
3. Profit
Pardon my southpark syntax, but it seems a simple solution, even if we didn't have these IP terrorists out there.
This way, they can keep their precious copy proection, and we the end user and have our lin-box too.
But I guess that's just too fucking simple
Why should Microsoft allow running Linux on their Xbox?
Microsoft should care because they are selling the xbox at a loss, based under the assumption that buying games will be profitable.
While you may disagree with their business practices, it's their product and they have the right to choose how it is sold. While I think they are missing a bet, as they chould choose to sell the Xbox with a basic linux distro, one designed for basic web browsing and e-mail, it's their choice not to create such a product. Sad really, but it's their choice.
---
As far as buying a $200 e-machine... well I'm not sure they are quite that cheep with deven TV output, and that's the marketable thing about the x-box, is it hooks up to a TV. While you can argue that you can get a video card with TVoutput, that'll take extra cables between your TV and your PC. The X-box is a $200 device that will fit nice into your AV stack. Further more, it's an ethernet device too.
For someone like my self, who would require a 33ft run between my PC and TV, i'd much rather go ethernet then Svideo. Cat5 is cheeper and reading a mpeg / avi file from my PC and playing on the Xbox is a fuck of alot better then a long ass Svideo run.
----
For me, it's not about being l33t geex0r, it's just practical. The x-box would be a useful product if it permited a basic operating system. I can use cheep wires to watch shit on my TV. I can download the required codex to play the media, and not have to worry about buying the approperate media player. It's only common sence... While there are those who don't mind having a PC next to their TV, or having a long ass cable run, there are those of us who just don't have the room nor the desire for implement it.
I'm thinking it doesn't take buckets of money to issue out ciece and desist letters. Signigent yes, but not buckets.
The real danger would be if SCO was permited to contact ISPs and able to shutdown end user's connections based on their belief of unauthorized use of IP. While this may seem somewhat paranoid, it would after all solve the glitch regarding actually taking end users to civil court. SCO after all didn't shut down your connection, your ISP did, your beef would be with them, and chances are you'd have to spend moolah to defend your self to get it turned back on. It is after all, in their mind's eye, a copyright violation.
just like the WMD crapola in iraq (there never were any, it never was about that), it was about the oil!
Really, I rather thought that the US sold WMD in the form of chemical and biological weapons to Iraq during the Bush the senior administration.
So, yes... this could be good example for the SCO case.
America sells WMD to Iraq, then uses this as evidence of them having WMD and invades the country.
SCO releases their achient Unix source code for education, people get educated and then sued for using their IP they got educated on.
I have to admit... while I would consider 100mph to be excessive [excepting long 300 mile streches of straight], I would think it's more dangerious to have two or more cars going at that speed.
Now the motorola solution, as in radio ahead and report an excessive speeder, so a trooper can get up to speed *before* the offender screems past, that would be somewhat safer.
---
On a diffrent note, I was in Montana when they had up on the road, "Reasonable and prudent" as the speed limit. While my first responce was, "cool" I considered 75 to be the fastest I would go. This was in the west on i-90 and the pesky mountains got in the way of my need to open up my throttle.
But, look at what they do if you descramble satellite feeds without paying.
Ahh, that's activly *descrambling* the data. That's going above and beyond, theft of services and all that. You need to buy a key of sorts to gain access to these services, unless you are in canada ofcorse.
intentionally taps, or makes any
unauthorized connection, whether physically, electrically,
acoustically, inductively
I do not claim to be a lawyer, but largly based on what i've observed tap, as in wire tap, only applies to audio tapping. As in, it might very well be legal to pop in a security camera so long as it doesn't pickup audio.
Further more, even the law you quoted implies *authorized access*. I would argue strongly that without basic security mesures that all people *are authorized* to access this material. It would be no diffrent, in my minds anyway, if they put up private information on a public web server, esp if google picks it up seeing no robots file in place.
I would further submit the fact that the service of WiFi netaccess is very much common place. For example, my local starbucks coffee offers WiFi access for a fee, and I know of one CAFE that offers public free WiFi access.
Given that this is a service offered in some establishments, a stumbler who accidently comes across access might reasonably assume that this is a service, given there was no security and *authorized access* is granted to everyone by the WiFi router based on a configeration choice by the system admin. My argument, which may or may not stand up in court, would be that because the system authorizes you that no law was broken, even if access to propriority data was made publicly available to anyone who requested access.
We can clearly agree the school fucked up, but I'd argue that they should be held criminaly liable because their WiFi network specificly grants *authorized access* to anyone. Just because it's an automated authorization system is no excuse in my minds eye, no diffrent then asking for propriority records and getting them by fax from an office worker that wasn't told better.
If it was me personaly, i'd say, "oh cool, public WiFi network, I can check my e-mail from here".
I'm not sure how this would qualify on electronic tresspass. It's one thing to physicaly or electronicly attempt entry, but when the radio waves are not encrypted and pass through you body?
I mean... if for example I had a WiFI card and I was on campus, which I would consider perfectly out of the ordinary, and I tripped upon a network connection, I would think "oh neet public WiFi". Just like if I was walking down the street and saw a path to a lake, "Oh neet a public lake".
My point is without notice, how do you expect people to know it's treaspass? Or on the other hand, without encryption, how do you expect people to know it's private? Without notice of private property, I don't think it's tresspass.
Common sence should rule in cases like this, as for radio reasonable attempts should be made to protect private communications, and if they are intercepted it's your own damn fault.