I didn't even realize that it was still possible to get anything in a betamax format. Seriously, I'm not trying to troll, but when was the last time anyone even saw a betamax tape for sale?
Back when I was a poor college student and PSU (The Pennsylvania State University) I remember a professor of mine in an algorithms class talk about the problem of searching a patent database. I forget all the figures, and who this professor was, and all the other important details, but I do remember he said that it was an extremely hard problem, to the point where PSU told the USPTO that it was impossible, because there was no way you could sustain the search at the rate patents were being submitted. It was something like, to do 1 keyword search (nothing fancy) it would take say an hour to do (I forget the numbers, like I said) at the time patents were rolling in at something much higher, like 200/hr or something alot higher than you would think.
So basically the long short of this garbled mess of memories is to do a really good search using all kinds of fancy algorithms and stuff on the full patent database would never work since there are too many patents to search, especially at the rate they are coming in.
And before you say "hardware has gotten a lot faster" remember this was brought up in an alorithm class, so it is doubtful that hardware has caught up to the rate they need. I really need to find a link to this problem so I can be a little more intelligent about this post.:-) (to google...)
I know this has been pointed out before, but isn't the whole point that they go after copyright infringers and not the software makers that produce napster and kazaa?
Now, granted, they are doing both. But we can't bitch when the government is going to prosecute the people who are infringing on copyrights. Just because the RIAA is involved, and the term DMCA has been used, does not mean that what is going on is wrong. Say what you will about "but the RIAA is EVIL!", it doesn't make infridging on their copyrights right (as in anywhere close to legal), and they and the justice department has every right to take people who do to court.
Now, you may also have issues about current copyright law. Granted, it isn't very good, but if you want the copyright law changed then bitch about the copyright law to your congressmen or representative. Don't take a stand on this issue, as far as they are concerned everyone who trades music on the net is a criminal, and you can do nothing about that. Convince them that the copyright law is way to long, many of our problems would go away if we could reduce it to something sane like 10-15 years.
And for all of those "we'll make a better system based on trust to trade music files" but don't want to play the political game, you are idiots. Who do you think they are going to prosecute? You and everyone else who uses that system. The only fight we have is in politics, there is no technical solution to this problem. As much as you would like to think you'll win this battle whipping up some code in C, you are going to find there is nothing you can code that will keep the handcuffs off of your hands. </rant>
Awhile back a roommate of mine started to get TV Guide in the mail, though he claimed he never ordered it. So he felt completely right in keeping it since it was unsoliciated. Well, after so much time (I forget how long), he started to get bills for it, and he just threw them out since he was "right".
Well, after so long they threatened to turn his account over to a collection agency, and he finally broke down and called them and told them he never ordered TV Guide and challenged them to prove that he did. They responded by telling him when he signed up for such-and-such contest (he put his address in a million forms on the web, trying to get free stuff) he agreed to a subscription of TV Guide. He then sheepishly wrote them a check and canceled his subscription.
The scale is based on the probability of something happening, then on the amount of destruction. Number 7 is a high probability (90-95%? likely) that an object will collide with us and cause a global catastrophe, Number 9 means that a regional disaster will definitely (100% likely) happen.
Eh, let's just call it even. I agree it was a sexist remark, but it was meant in good fun. Yes he could have joked around differently, but let's not split hairs.
That's very true, I read that the livejournal meetup had one that met in a parking lot.
Personally I didn't mind the Dormont choice, I live in Dormont, so it was very easy for me to get to. However someplace in Sq. Hill would have been nice too. Personally I would have loved to goto Silky's (The sports bar, not the strip club... but that would have been good to). We need to get ahold of these meetup people and demand better choices!
I figured that since a few Pittsburgh people RSVPed someone would actually show up. I sat around in an empty bar for about a 1/2 hour waiting for someone to come, drinking a over blended whiskey sour, and eating stale pretzels. Who the hell picked that place anyways? The only upside to this was the place picked is a 5 minuted drive from my place.
And yes, it was just me in the bar. Not even another customer. Just me and the old bartender who could hear anything I said. Argh, stupid meet-up.
My question is, why do we need a new law in the first place? Last time I checked all those things you mentioned are already illegal. My worry is someone will get life for doing something that doesn't "threaten" or whatever a human life. Well, it doesn't really matter anyways. It's not like he'll get a trail under our military tribunal system anyways.
I disagree. Part of the government's job to to protect its citizens. That means companies that attempt to decieve you must be cracked down on. That's why we have truth in advertising laws, and that's why they are cracking down on search engines. Can you honestly say given any search engine you can tell if it has paid results or not? Can you honestly say that you know for sure that google doesn't do that? I sure can't, so how will I know who to choose based on paid placement of links?
My roommate in college built a "security system" involving a web cam and several dozen feet of stereo wire, and a few paperclips. Basically he built a circuit through the door, and when it was broken it would start snapping pictures and post them on a website on his computer. We figured we could use it to catch thieves, until we realized that if they stole his computer all our evidence went with them.:-(
Personally I think we would have been better off running the camera up to the window of the female room above us, but that's just me.;-)
Seriously, and when I went to see it there were WAY more adults there than kids. And not parents who brought their kids, there were tons of adults that came either by themselves or other adults.
But remember Microsoft has TONS of money. If their goal is to own the living room, then by god they will own the living room. Just wait till they day they say the hell with it, drop the Xbox, come out with the Y box, sell that for about $10, and wait until everyone owns one and Sony and Nintendo are out of the console business.
At this point they use their monopoly in the console market to force TV manufactures to make TVs that support some sort of "innovation". Then it will daisy chain from there until MS software, and possibly hardware, runs your entire house.
Of course the flaw in this paranoid delusion is for it to work MS has to offer more than a cheap console and a bunch of crappy games. If all they have to offer for the $10 Ybox is Halo2: More shooting then the gamers will still probably flock to the PS3 with GTA4: Killing some more Hos.
Hmmm, the trick there is to sleep with one of them though. I know you can always start with the least attractive one, but in some cases that would be worse than just spending Saturday night with your cat. (No I have no cats, just snakes).
Yes, I took a class that mentions that. Not to be crude, but to get that you have to dip your dick into a pool of urine on the edge of the toliet bowl. So I'll amend my last comment and say don't sit or dip your dick (I doubt the ladies can dip their parts into any pools on the toilet) into anything wet.
It's funny how you mention their spreading of FUD. I acutally used to work for a small, internet privacy company whose whole business model centered around people become a lot more paranoid over cookies than they should be. Yes, doubleclick cookies are bad, but we were telling everyone under the sun that web-bugs could steal documents, sabotage servers, the works. We were really describing viruses and spyware, but we only handled the cookie part of things. They're out of business now, I couldn't tell you why.;-)
Slashdot Mirror
I didn't even realize that it was still possible to get anything in a betamax format. Seriously, I'm not trying to troll, but when was the last time anyone even saw a betamax tape for sale?
It's late in the discussion, but here I go....
:-) (to google...)
Back when I was a poor college student and PSU (The Pennsylvania State University) I remember a professor of mine in an algorithms class talk about the problem of searching a patent database. I forget all the figures, and who this professor was, and all the other important details, but I do remember he said that it was an extremely hard problem, to the point where PSU told the USPTO that it was impossible, because there was no way you could sustain the search at the rate patents were being submitted. It was something like, to do 1 keyword search (nothing fancy) it would take say an hour to do (I forget the numbers, like I said) at the time patents were rolling in at something much higher, like 200/hr or something alot higher than you would think.
So basically the long short of this garbled mess of memories is to do a really good search using all kinds of fancy algorithms and stuff on the full patent database would never work since there are too many patents to search, especially at the rate they are coming in.
And before you say "hardware has gotten a lot faster" remember this was brought up in an alorithm class, so it is doubtful that hardware has caught up to the rate they need. I really need to find a link to this problem so I can be a little more intelligent about this post.
Ironically enough, at my old start-up I think renting out office space was 95% of our revenue. I'm serious.
I know this has been pointed out before, but isn't the whole point that they go after copyright infringers and not the software makers that produce napster and kazaa?
Now, granted, they are doing both. But we can't bitch when the government is going to prosecute the people who are infringing on copyrights. Just because the RIAA is involved, and the term DMCA has been used, does not mean that what is going on is wrong. Say what you will about "but the RIAA is EVIL!", it doesn't make infridging on their copyrights right (as in anywhere close to legal), and they and the justice department has every right to take people who do to court.
Now, you may also have issues about current copyright law. Granted, it isn't very good, but if you want the copyright law changed then bitch about the copyright law to your congressmen or representative. Don't take a stand on this issue, as far as they are concerned everyone who trades music on the net is a criminal, and you can do nothing about that. Convince them that the copyright law is way to long, many of our problems would go away if we could reduce it to something sane like 10-15 years.
And for all of those "we'll make a better system based on trust to trade music files" but don't want to play the political game, you are idiots. Who do you think they are going to prosecute? You and everyone else who uses that system. The only fight we have is in politics, there is no technical solution to this problem. As much as you would like to think you'll win this battle whipping up some code in C, you are going to find there is nothing you can code that will keep the handcuffs off of your hands.
</rant>
Every time I see the name sex.com I think of the dot.com I used to work for, and how everyone there got fscked.
Awhile back a roommate of mine started to get TV Guide in the mail, though he claimed he never ordered it. So he felt completely right in keeping it since it was unsoliciated. Well, after so much time (I forget how long), he started to get bills for it, and he just threw them out since he was "right".
Well, after so long they threatened to turn his account over to a collection agency, and he finally broke down and called them and told them he never ordered TV Guide and challenged them to prove that he did. They responded by telling him when he signed up for such-and-such contest (he put his address in a million forms on the web, trying to get free stuff) he agreed to a subscription of TV Guide. He then sheepishly wrote them a check and canceled his subscription.
Just thought I'd share a funny story.
The scale is based on the probability of something happening, then on the amount of destruction. Number 7 is a high probability (90-95%? likely) that an object will collide with us and cause a global catastrophe, Number 9 means that a regional disaster will definitely (100% likely) happen.
+1 insightful
-1 no humor
Eh, let's just call it even. I agree it was a sexist remark, but it was meant in good fun. Yes he could have joked around differently, but let's not split hairs.
That's very true, I read that the livejournal meetup had one that met in a parking lot.
Personally I didn't mind the Dormont choice, I live in Dormont, so it was very easy for me to get to. However someplace in Sq. Hill would have been nice too. Personally I would have loved to goto Silky's (The sports bar, not the strip club... but that would have been good to). We need to get ahold of these meetup people and demand better choices!
It was in the Suburban Room, a little bar out in Dormont. It looked like a nice place, until I bit into a pretzel. Yuck!
Oh man, I love HAND too. That's where we should have gone.
I figured that since a few Pittsburgh people RSVPed someone would actually show up. I sat around in an empty bar for about a 1/2 hour waiting for someone to come, drinking a over blended whiskey sour, and eating stale pretzels. Who the hell picked that place anyways? The only upside to this was the place picked is a 5 minuted drive from my place.
And yes, it was just me in the bar. Not even another customer. Just me and the old bartender who could hear anything I said. Argh, stupid meet-up.
My question is, why do we need a new law in the first place? Last time I checked all those things you mentioned are already illegal. My worry is someone will get life for doing something that doesn't "threaten" or whatever a human life. Well, it doesn't really matter anyways. It's not like he'll get a trail under our military tribunal system anyways.
I so wish I could get one of those to hack around with. But $45K is a bit much for me. Hell, I can't even pay the $2k/mth developer's license.
I disagree. Part of the government's job to to protect its citizens. That means companies that attempt to decieve you must be cracked down on. That's why we have truth in advertising laws, and that's why they are cracking down on search engines. Can you honestly say given any search engine you can tell if it has paid results or not? Can you honestly say that you know for sure that google doesn't do that? I sure can't, so how will I know who to choose based on paid placement of links?
Put the site up on slashdot and *BOOM* we take it down.
I hope This guy saw this comment and moderation. :-)
My roommate in college built a "security system" involving a web cam and several dozen feet of stereo wire, and a few paperclips. Basically he built a circuit through the door, and when it was broken it would start snapping pictures and post them on a website on his computer. We figured we could use it to catch thieves, until we realized that if they stole his computer all our evidence went with them. :-(
;-)
Personally I think we would have been better off running the camera up to the window of the female room above us, but that's just me.
Here here. That's the reason I keep chasing all these artsy type women. Too bad most of them like artsy guys. :-(
:-)
Of course all that means is when I find the right girl she'll be exceptional.
Seriously, and when I went to see it there were WAY more adults there than kids. And not parents who brought their kids, there were tons of adults that came either by themselves or other adults.
But remember Microsoft has TONS of money. If their goal is to own the living room, then by god they will own the living room. Just wait till they day they say the hell with it, drop the Xbox, come out with the Y box, sell that for about $10, and wait until everyone owns one and Sony and Nintendo are out of the console business.
At this point they use their monopoly in the console market to force TV manufactures to make TVs that support some sort of "innovation". Then it will daisy chain from there until MS software, and possibly hardware, runs your entire house.
Of course the flaw in this paranoid delusion is for it to work MS has to offer more than a cheap console and a bunch of crappy games. If all they have to offer for the $10 Ybox is Halo2: More shooting then the gamers will still probably flock to the PS3 with GTA4: Killing some more Hos.
Dude, I wish I knew girls that cool. The good head thing sounds interesting, maybe I should look at those personal sites again....
Hmmm, the trick there is to sleep with one of them though. I know you can always start with the least attractive one, but in some cases that would be worse than just spending Saturday night with your cat. (No I have no cats, just snakes).
Yes, I took a class that mentions that. Not to be crude, but to get that you have to dip your dick into a pool of urine on the edge of the toliet bowl. So I'll amend my last comment and say don't sit or dip your dick (I doubt the ladies can dip their parts into any pools on the toilet) into anything wet.
It's funny how you mention their spreading of FUD. I acutally used to work for a small, internet privacy company whose whole business model centered around people become a lot more paranoid over cookies than they should be. Yes, doubleclick cookies are bad, but we were telling everyone under the sun that web-bugs could steal documents, sabotage servers, the works. We were really describing viruses and spyware, but we only handled the cookie part of things. They're out of business now, I couldn't tell you why. ;-)