I've watched a few movies on my PS2, and as far as I can tell there is no difference. The only complaint I have is that it is a bit odd to control it using a ps2 controller, but once the movie is started its no big deal. Its definately worth buying one, since you get to play all the games along with it =)
I heard that they made a newer version of that monster that had 64 EE chips in it, dont remember where I saw it from but a few searches on google should pull up something. *drools*
I wonder how long a transmeta crusoe processor could last with one aa battery, this other processor sounds like it has some promise. Wish we could see some of these transmeta processors out there to tell though *cough cough*
It takes me about 3 minutes for the game to start in windows, after I run the exe, it doens't look like it did anything until a few minutes later.. Using a TNT2 if that helps...
It also helps to read the article. What the judge is saying, is that after someone deletes something, and it s, lets say, 6 months old, even if they can bring the data back, it would be inadmissable in court. I think this mostly applies to a home computer, and you make something in notepad or whatever, and you delete it. 4 years down the road, they are able to pull that data off of the hard drive, but since its so old, it wouldn't be able to be used.
That link that was in the story let me thru without any sort of login.. maybe you should try it first before bitching...
Re:[Potential troll] What DviX is really used for
on
DivX ;-) Deux Update
·
· Score: 1
Ok, i did just that, searched for how to rip a dvd, first link:
http://perso.libertysurf.fr/nvorip/
No mention of any sort of DeCSS i have to download under the essential download section..
Second link
http://www.divx-digest.com/software/index.html#ess ential
No mention here of DeCSS either..
I could go on, but I guess my search engine only shows me pages that come from people who have no idea what they are doing. I could probably go thru toms hardware guide and rip a dvd without using DeCSS, sure, maybe one of the programs out there does something similar to what DeCSS does, but I dont think that any program out there yet has the actual decss code in it, not sure if the Livid player is out yet, but I dont have a dvd drive at home (no real point in it, in my opinion), I just use my home dvd player. My point of all that was that anytime anyone mentions ripping dvd's lately, decss is mentioned, which it shouldn't be, because there are other ways of ripping dvd's besides using that. Try doing a bit of research yourself anonymous coward...
Re:[Potential troll] What DviX is really used for
on
DivX ;-) Deux Update
·
· Score: 1
This is why the MPAA won the first round. This is what DeCSS.exe (Yes, the Win32 program, not the LiViD player) is being used for. It is certainly possible to transfer enough of a DVD to a 650 MB CD-ROM using this technology.
Who says that DeCSS is being used for this? I read Tom's Hardware guide to doing this, and it didn't mention needing DeCSS.exe at all, here is all you needed:
PC system with DVD-ROM drive (country code perhaps enabled)
Processor from 450 MHz, because of high computer power requirements
Windows 98 or Windows 2000
Flask Mpeg and Divx software codec
This really doens't have much to do with DeCSS, its showing us the actual way to pirate a DVD without it, which I would say most of the people out there who post these movies on the net are doing, using DiVX to get it down to a 600mb or so file. A 600mb file can pretty easily be downloaded even on a 56k modem, just use RAR and put them in 10mb chunks, it'll come down eventually. Is this going to stop people from buying movies? I really doubt it. I rent DVD movies all the time, I buy them a lot too, I have probably 20 movies on dvd, I have a DSL line to that I can get these movies pretty quickly, but it doens't compare to going out and buying them on a real disk, with Dolby Digital sound and the nice picture quality that DVD's provide. Will this stop people from renting movies, I doubt that too, just sit outside of your local movie rental shop, I know mine must make bank every day, they rent movies all the time. Its much more convienent then downloading a movie and watching it on your pc. It may make pirating movies much easier, but the cd burner made copying cds bit for bit much easier too, but musicians are still in buisness. Heck a computer made all this much easier, but as you can tell, there are tons of other reasons to use a computer, so lets not try to get them banned as well...
That guy probably works for a hard drive company, and we all know they dont require any math skills, so they just teach them that 1000 gigs is one terrabyte.
Its a terrabyte drive that fits in a 5.25 rackmount, id say its a bit newsworthy, I dont know much about rackmount hard drive systems, so I dont know if this is a first, but its pretty interesting nonetheless.
If you look in that EULA, im sure you'll find the good ol line that says the EULA can be changed or modified at any time, its a pretty standard thing in a EULA... Funny thing is, i never remember having to agree to that at all when I got mine, i opened the bag, my cd fell out and i can't find it =P
Also, with the current cd burners out there, I doubt they are illegal, because they are not marketed as a device to circumvent technological protections on copyritten works. Sure you can copy cd's with it, and I see cd burners as a much bigger problem then Decss is, but the law isn't always clear cut. I think ill study the DMCA a bit this weekend, im keeping some notes and stuff up at www.bahemut.com/decss for those who want to read up on it a bit, its only my opinion and some info may be wrong, so let me know and I can correct it.. (god i hope it doens't get slashdot'd, its only on a 128k upload connection =P)
Ya, i was thinking about this, it seems that the reason that Decss was made illegal is because its sole intention was to decrypt CSS. With the DMCA, and how it is worded, it seems that if DeCSS was just a small part in the Livid dvd player for linux, then there wouldn't be a problem, but i dont think Livid got a liscense at all to get a CSS decrypter, so im not sure what exactly would have come out of it. If they could have shown it be part of the Livid dvd player, the device's sole intention would not have been to decrypt dvds, but it would have been to watch them on linux. I guess we will just have to wait and see.. lets give copyleft.net the best of luck in their upcoming decss case in california!
Yea, I would agree that the whole DMCA is a bit messed up, im amazed it passed when it did. It really changes what copyright was originally intended for. And a few posts up above, maybe I dont quite understand what Veteran is trying to say, but it would be good to have a slashdot discussion about it, ill be here all day =P
The view of the DMCA is that anything which CAN be used to copy protected music is illegal.
From the actual text of the DMCA, this is what I found:
`(2) No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that--
`(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title;
`(B) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title; or
`(C) is marketed by that person or another acting in concert with that person with that person's knowledge for use in circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.
DeCSS wasn't primarily used for copying anything, the reason it was illegal is because it circumvented the technological measures places on the DVD's by the DVD-CCA. I still dont understand where in the DMCA it says this: "Under the DMCA any player which does NOT use the watermark is a device which is 'bypassing digital copy protection means' and is thus ILLEGAL." I can maybe understand that if someone came out with a player that supports SDMI music, but doesn't do any checks for it, then I'd you are correct in your statement, but as you state it, you say that ANY player which does not use the watermark will be illegal. What if i buy a device that doesn't support any music that has watermarks? Take a portable cd player that supports MP3's, why would it have to support watermarks? If you could, please quote the DMCA where it does say this.
Here is the url for the complete text of the DMCA, i haven't read the whole DMCA, its not the most interesting reading there is, but ill look for anything like that too. In any case, listening to music doesn't sound like anything anyone will be doing in the future if all this continues.
One thing I dont understand about this is what is going to stop me from using mp3's? I have a few programs that take an audio cd, and will make mp3's out of it, as long as I keep a copy of that program, I should be able to make mp3's until cd's are no longer made. We are starting to see a lot of hardware mp3 players too, Awia is coming out with a car cd player that will support cdr's with mp3's burnt onto them. Mp3's have saturated the market so much, that I doubt a restrictive music format that they are trying to do will ever work out, they would really have to make it so cd audio cant be ripped to mp3 with these programs, but I doubt they could do that and still keep the cd's working in the millions of players out there.
If anything, I dont see what will stop me from taking my audio out and putting it back into my audio in, play the digitally watermarked file, and just hit record. I know this isn't possible with DVD's because of CSS and how it does something in between the frames of the movies that a VCR cant understand. Does anyone know if the SDMI has anything like this built in? Soon as I record that to a wave file, I can then burn it to an mp3 and ill have my own mp3 of that file. It seems to me the only people that would support this is going to be the record companies, the RIAA, and all the lawyers and all that, pretty much the money grubbing evil people of the world that treat music as a commercial entity that the sole purpose of it is to make money. Music has never had these types of restrictions in the past, its scary to think how music will be treated 5 years in the future..
I have been reading a bit on the SDMI thing, and it says that the players will support mp3 and sdmi enabled music. I dont think that a company could get in trouble if they just make an mp3 player and thats it. Where in the DMCA does it say that a device that plays audio MUST support SDMI enabled music?
Actually Aol didn't use the netscape browser because of a longterm contract that Aol and Microsoft have together, as soon as that contract is up, you should see Aol being powered by Netscape, or Gecko, whatever it is whenever that happens..
Slashdot Mirror
I've watched a few movies on my PS2, and as far as I can tell there is no difference. The only complaint I have is that it is a bit odd to control it using a ps2 controller, but once the movie is started its no big deal. Its definately worth buying one, since you get to play all the games along with it =)
Torin
I heard that they made a newer version of that monster that had 64 EE chips in it, dont remember where I saw it from but a few searches on google should pull up something. *drools*
Ok back to playin the ps2, see yas!
Torin
My friend at work has this video, I can post it up someplace today if you want to grab it, try going to www.bahemut.com/cat in about 8 or so hours.
nt
I wonder how long a transmeta crusoe processor could last with one aa battery, this other processor sounds like it has some promise. Wish we could see some of these transmeta processors out there to tell though *cough cough*
It takes me about 3 minutes for the game to start in windows, after I run the exe, it doens't look like it did anything until a few minutes later.. Using a TNT2 if that helps...
It also helps to read the article. What the judge is saying, is that after someone deletes something, and it s, lets say, 6 months old, even if they can bring the data back, it would be inadmissable in court. I think this mostly applies to a home computer, and you make something in notepad or whatever, and you delete it. 4 years down the road, they are able to pull that data off of the hard drive, but since its so old, it wouldn't be able to be used.
That link that was in the story let me thru without any sort of login.. maybe you should try it first before bitching...
Ok, i did just that, searched for how to rip a dvd, first link: http://perso.libertysurf.fr/nvorip/ No mention of any sort of DeCSS i have to download under the essential download section.. Second link http://www.divx-digest.com/software/index.html#ess ential
No mention here of DeCSS either..
I could go on, but I guess my search engine only shows me pages that come from people who have no idea what they are doing. I could probably go thru toms hardware guide and rip a dvd without using DeCSS, sure, maybe one of the programs out there does something similar to what DeCSS does, but I dont think that any program out there yet has the actual decss code in it, not sure if the Livid player is out yet, but I dont have a dvd drive at home (no real point in it, in my opinion), I just use my home dvd player. My point of all that was that anytime anyone mentions ripping dvd's lately, decss is mentioned, which it shouldn't be, because there are other ways of ripping dvd's besides using that. Try doing a bit of research yourself anonymous coward...
Who says that DeCSS is being used for this? I read Tom's Hardware guide to doing this, and it didn't mention needing DeCSS.exe at all, here is all you needed:
PC system with DVD-ROM drive (country code perhaps enabled)
Processor from 450 MHz, because of high computer power requirements
Windows 98 or Windows 2000
Flask Mpeg and Divx software codec
This really doens't have much to do with DeCSS, its showing us the actual way to pirate a DVD without it, which I would say most of the people out there who post these movies on the net are doing, using DiVX to get it down to a 600mb or so file. A 600mb file can pretty easily be downloaded even on a 56k modem, just use RAR and put them in 10mb chunks, it'll come down eventually. Is this going to stop people from buying movies? I really doubt it. I rent DVD movies all the time, I buy them a lot too, I have probably 20 movies on dvd, I have a DSL line to that I can get these movies pretty quickly, but it doens't compare to going out and buying them on a real disk, with Dolby Digital sound and the nice picture quality that DVD's provide. Will this stop people from renting movies, I doubt that too, just sit outside of your local movie rental shop, I know mine must make bank every day, they rent movies all the time. Its much more convienent then downloading a movie and watching it on your pc. It may make pirating movies much easier, but the cd burner made copying cds bit for bit much easier too, but musicians are still in buisness. Heck a computer made all this much easier, but as you can tell, there are tons of other reasons to use a computer, so lets not try to get them banned as well...
IANAL, but cant a library archive information? I find it discusting when a library can no longer hold information because of stupid copyright laws...
That guy probably works for a hard drive company, and we all know they dont require any math skills, so they just teach them that 1000 gigs is one terrabyte.
Its a terrabyte drive that fits in a 5.25 rackmount, id say its a bit newsworthy, I dont know much about rackmount hard drive systems, so I dont know if this is a first, but its pretty interesting nonetheless.
If you look in that EULA, im sure you'll find the good ol line that says the EULA can be changed or modified at any time, its a pretty standard thing in a EULA... Funny thing is, i never remember having to agree to that at all when I got mine, i opened the bag, my cd fell out and i can't find it =P
Also, with the current cd burners out there, I doubt they are illegal, because they are not marketed as a device to circumvent technological protections on copyritten works. Sure you can copy cd's with it, and I see cd burners as a much bigger problem then Decss is, but the law isn't always clear cut. I think ill study the DMCA a bit this weekend, im keeping some notes and stuff up at www.bahemut.com/decss for those who want to read up on it a bit, its only my opinion and some info may be wrong, so let me know and I can correct it.. (god i hope it doens't get slashdot'd, its only on a 128k upload connection =P)
Ya, i was thinking about this, it seems that the reason that Decss was made illegal is because its sole intention was to decrypt CSS. With the DMCA, and how it is worded, it seems that if DeCSS was just a small part in the Livid dvd player for linux, then there wouldn't be a problem, but i dont think Livid got a liscense at all to get a CSS decrypter, so im not sure what exactly would have come out of it. If they could have shown it be part of the Livid dvd player, the device's sole intention would not have been to decrypt dvds, but it would have been to watch them on linux. I guess we will just have to wait and see.. lets give copyleft.net the best of luck in their upcoming decss case in california!
Torin
Yea, I would agree that the whole DMCA is a bit messed up, im amazed it passed when it did. It really changes what copyright was originally intended for. And a few posts up above, maybe I dont quite understand what Veteran is trying to say, but it would be good to have a slashdot discussion about it, ill be here all day =P
`(2) No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic in any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof, that--
`(A) is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title;
`(B) has only limited commercially significant purpose or use other than to circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title; or
`(C) is marketed by that person or another acting in concert with that person with that person's knowledge for use in circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.
DeCSS wasn't primarily used for copying anything, the reason it was illegal is because it circumvented the technological measures places on the DVD's by the DVD-CCA. I still dont understand where in the DMCA it says this: "Under the DMCA any player which does NOT use the watermark is a device which is 'bypassing digital copy protection means' and is thus ILLEGAL." I can maybe understand that if someone came out with a player that supports SDMI music, but doesn't do any checks for it, then I'd you are correct in your statement, but as you state it, you say that ANY player which does not use the watermark will be illegal. What if i buy a device that doesn't support any music that has watermarks? Take a portable cd player that supports MP3's, why would it have to support watermarks? If you could, please quote the DMCA where it does say this.
Here is the url for the complete text of the DMCA, i haven't read the whole DMCA, its not the most interesting reading there is, but ill look for anything like that too. In any case, listening to music doesn't sound like anything anyone will be doing in the future if all this continues.
Digital Millenium Copyright Act
If anything, I dont see what will stop me from taking my audio out and putting it back into my audio in, play the digitally watermarked file, and just hit record. I know this isn't possible with DVD's because of CSS and how it does something in between the frames of the movies that a VCR cant understand. Does anyone know if the SDMI has anything like this built in? Soon as I record that to a wave file, I can then burn it to an mp3 and ill have my own mp3 of that file. It seems to me the only people that would support this is going to be the record companies, the RIAA, and all the lawyers and all that, pretty much the money grubbing evil people of the world that treat music as a commercial entity that the sole purpose of it is to make money. Music has never had these types of restrictions in the past, its scary to think how music will be treated 5 years in the future..
I have been reading a bit on the SDMI thing, and it says that the players will support mp3 and sdmi enabled music. I dont think that a company could get in trouble if they just make an mp3 player and thats it. Where in the DMCA does it say that a device that plays audio MUST support SDMI enabled music?
DVD-CCA has nothing to do with the RIAA, has a lot more to do with the MPAA.
Actually Aol didn't use the netscape browser because of a longterm contract that Aol and Microsoft have together, as soon as that contract is up, you should see Aol being powered by Netscape, or Gecko, whatever it is whenever that happens..