No, no. It _is_ a democracy. Here in the Corporate States of America, my $1 bribe to the politician counts just as much as your $1 bribe to the politician which counts just as much as every $1 in the $100,000 bribe given to the politician by the corporation. It's a beautiful thing, isn't it...
Yes, but the company also said "recall products that infringe on the patents" If you own a (CD|CD-R|CD-RW|DVD|etc) drive that infringes on the patent, I would think it would fall into the category of "products that infringe on the patents" Keep in mind that a recall usually means getting the customer to return the product to the manufacturer.
The way I read it, magnasuck is suing to have the manufacturers buy back every product ever sold that infringes on the patents, destroy them all and pay damages on top of that.
No, it makes perfect sense. The SDMI is threatening a lawsuit because their watermarking techniques were never _really_ meant to provide security. They were meant to provide the facade of security so that they can claim it "adequately" protects their music and sue the pants off anyone who tries to break it. It's all been carefully crafted. Last fall they opened their watermarking algorithms to the "hacker" community for a month to see if they could break it. 1 month. Which they thought wouldn't be enough time. Part of the _legal_ restrictions of the "contest" were that if you cracked it, you couldn't tell anyone how. Another part of the _legal_ restrictions of the contest was that trying to crack the watermarks the day after the contest ended was a violation of the DMCA. The contest was a complete success, for the SDMI anyway, and now they have proof that the watermarks are "adequate." This adds beef to their claim that the DMCA applies to their watermarks and can do what they have been wanting to do all along: sue (or threaten to) everyone and anyone who pisses them off. Say, for instance Dr. Felten
Offtopic, I know, but I saw your sig, and... well... not sure if there's an official continuation of that song, but, well, the creative juices are flowing this morning and here's my version
I'm a Karma Whore and I'm ok,
I work all night and I post all day.
I troll slashdot
And flame JonKatz,
I like to get first post
I have a dozen accounts
But use HiNote the most
I'm a Karma Whore and I'm ok,
I work all night and I post all day.
I post AC,
Reply to sigs
I complain and I whine
I like to spell micro$oft
With a dollar sign
I'm a Karma Whore and I'm ok,
I work all night and I post all day.
I flame a lot
I use 1337 5p34k
Then people envy me
I wish I was hacker
Not just a skript kiddie
I'm a Karma Whore and I'm ok,
I work all night and I post all day.
Their original plan was to just charge every person in the world $500 a year. They figured that this 'internet' thingy was just making it too difficult to exploit the consumer in a fair and even way. They also heard rumors that two people were sharing a CD (and in some cases even listening to it at the same time) which cuts into their profits. They had a proposal they were going to submit to the UN this week, but held off because they are still debating whether or not they will give a $10 discount to people who do not have electricity and therefore are a 'reduced risk for piracy.' In a month or two, we should hear more about this plan, so keep your pants on 'till then.
So let me get this straight. The RIAA wants to put huge barriers in the way of the legal use of napster, effectively eliminating it. Then the only use of napster will either be illegal - and they'll then get it shut down, or non-existant - and they won't have to worry. Why am I not surprised?
(And I hope streaming isn't the only option -- What's wrong with a nice downloadable version? Not everyone has a fast connection.)
I wholeheartedly agree. I never saw a benefit of (not live) streaming media, especially at home over a dial-up. I'd rather wait 10 minutes while a 2 minute video clip downloads than watch the horribly crap-ified streamed version of the same clip. The supposed benefits of streamed media (It doesn't take up space on your hard drive) are a mute point when the price and size of today's disk drives are taken into effect. So what's the benefit? Is it simply that the producers of said media want to controll its distribution? If so, well, its working: not only do I not re-distribute streaming media, I don't watch it myself.
Your example holds, if you assume you pick correctly on the first guess 50% of the time, which is a flawed assumption (unless the game show is rigged, of course)
Try looking at it this way: Monty knows which door the prize is behind. If your first pick is a door with no prize behind it, he can choose to open either of the other doors. If your first pick isn't the door with the prize behind it, he has to open the other door with no prize -- he doesn't have a choice. At the point where you pick a door (say door 1) and Monty is about to open a door there are three possibilities
Possibility 1: Prize is behind door 1: 50% chance Monty will open either
Possibility 2: Prize is behind door 2: 100% chance Monty will open door door 3. 0% chance Monty will open door 2
Possibility 3: Prize is behind door 3: 0% chance Monty will open door 3. 100% chance Monty will open door 2.
Each possibility has a 33% chance of happening. With Possibility 1, if you stay, you win and if you switch, you lose. With Possibility 2, if you stay, you lose and if you switch, you win. With Possibility 3, if you stay, you lose and if you switch, you win. Therefore the probability of switching and winning is 2/3.
Yeah I can tell the difference: it's in the price tag. These incremental releases keep the prices falling. To me, this release means that I am one step closer to getting the 800 Mhz processor I have my eyes on.
One recent study, published in The Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, found that out of 132 cats that fell an average of 5.5 storeys, 90 per cent survived, including one that fell 45 storeys.
I like cats and all, but I found the mental picture I formed while reading this quite funny: Men dressed in white lab coats conducting an official study by throwing cats out windows to see if they'd survive, with another man with a clipboard and white lab coat standing on the ground tallying the results.
I can still remember teaching my brother how to use the word processor on our old Apple IIGS. He had started working on a document, and wanted to save it, so I showed him how to select 'save' from the menu. When prompted for a name, he asked what he should call the file. I told him to call it whatever he wanted. Thinking himself funny, he called it 'bob' After a few months of naming files that way, he wanted help opening a file that he created a while ago. We started the word processor and tried to open the file. We got to the directory where he had been saving stuff and found it full of 'names' He couldn't remember what he had named the file; was it frank, suzy, thomas, henry, etc? I can still remember his comment. "Oh, I guess that wasn't such a good idea."
My point here is that if you can't easily tell what a file is by looking at its name, the naming scheme is flawed. 8.3 can be restrictive in that manner, although the extreme other end (ie 'this file...foggy day.microsoft word') isn't that great either.
You're right, willmc got that part wrong. According to TFA, the moth "is sterile, but sexually active; it is designed to mate with wild relatives and eliminate their offspring."
No not really. In order to use a regular packet sniffer, you have to know the encryption key(s) and the network name, otherwise the radio card will drop the packets before they are passed along to your laptop.
You're right. No one will jump on this willingly. But then the software vendors will insist that you uninstall the software and return all installation media to them (as the EULA allows). Then there will be many (unhappy) customers.
I think it has something to do with the fact that with every Patent Pending article there are dozens of "I'm going to patent {something stupidly obvious} and you will all owe me money" posts. You post simply repeats (in concept anyway) what was posted numerous times before.
Not meaning to flame, but aren't you advocating groupthink? You are saying that to publicly question the current scientific majority is wrong. The scientific majority isn't always correct, and questioning it is what sparks further research that eventually proves one side or the other. Maybe I misunderstood you, but it seems like you are advocating censoring museums, by mandating what a museum can and cannot say.
Slashdot Mirror
No, no. It _is_ a democracy. Here in the Corporate States of America, my $1 bribe to the politician counts just as much as your $1 bribe to the politician which counts just as much as every $1 in the $100,000 bribe given to the politician by the corporation. It's a beautiful thing, isn't it...
Yes, but the company also said "recall products that infringe on the patents" If you own a (CD|CD-R|CD-RW|DVD|etc) drive that infringes on the patent, I would think it would fall into the category of "products that infringe on the patents" Keep in mind that a recall usually means getting the customer to return the product to the manufacturer.
The way I read it, magnasuck is suing to have the manufacturers buy back every product ever sold that infringes on the patents, destroy them all and pay damages on top of that.
Ah-ha. He admits it. Taco _does_ have an agenda...
No, it makes perfect sense. The SDMI is threatening a lawsuit because their watermarking techniques were never _really_ meant to provide security. They were meant to provide the facade of security so that they can claim it "adequately" protects their music and sue the pants off anyone who tries to break it. It's all been carefully crafted. Last fall they opened their watermarking algorithms to the "hacker" community for a month to see if they could break it. 1 month. Which they thought wouldn't be enough time. Part of the _legal_ restrictions of the "contest" were that if you cracked it, you couldn't tell anyone how. Another part of the _legal_ restrictions of the contest was that trying to crack the watermarks the day after the contest ended was a violation of the DMCA. The contest was a complete success, for the SDMI anyway, and now they have proof that the watermarks are "adequate." This adds beef to their claim that the DMCA applies to their watermarks and can do what they have been wanting to do all along: sue (or threaten to) everyone and anyone who pisses them off. Say, for instance Dr. Felten
Except that would defeat the whole "search" thingy that made napster so popular.
Offtopic, I know, but I saw your sig, and ... well ... not sure if there's an official continuation of that song, but, well, the creative juices are flowing this morning and here's my version
I'm a Karma Whore and I'm ok,
I work all night and I post all day.
I troll slashdot
And flame JonKatz,
I like to get first post
I have a dozen accounts
But use HiNote the most
I'm a Karma Whore and I'm ok,
I work all night and I post all day.
I post AC,
Reply to sigs
I complain and I whine
I like to spell micro$oft
With a dollar sign
I'm a Karma Whore and I'm ok,
I work all night and I post all day.
I flame a lot
I use 1337 5p34k
Then people envy me
I wish I was hacker
Not just a skript kiddie
I'm a Karma Whore and I'm ok,
I work all night and I post all day.
STOP READING YOUR STUPID PHONE AND GET YOUR EYES BACK ON THE ROAD!
these are lower-case letters to get by the lameness filter. i know caps is like yelling, i did it on purpose
Their original plan was to just charge every person in the world $500 a year. They figured that this 'internet' thingy was just making it too difficult to exploit the consumer in a fair and even way. They also heard rumors that two people were sharing a CD (and in some cases even listening to it at the same time) which cuts into their profits. They had a proposal they were going to submit to the UN this week, but held off because they are still debating whether or not they will give a $10 discount to people who do not have electricity and therefore are a 'reduced risk for piracy.' In a month or two, we should hear more about this plan, so keep your pants on 'till then.
So let me get this straight. The RIAA wants to put huge barriers in the way of the legal use of napster, effectively eliminating it. Then the only use of napster will either be illegal - and they'll then get it shut down, or non-existant - and they won't have to worry. Why am I not surprised?
(And I hope streaming isn't the only option -- What's wrong with a nice downloadable version? Not everyone has a fast connection.)
I wholeheartedly agree. I never saw a benefit of (not live) streaming media, especially at home over a dial-up. I'd rather wait 10 minutes while a 2 minute video clip downloads than watch the horribly crap-ified streamed version of the same clip. The supposed benefits of streamed media (It doesn't take up space on your hard drive) are a mute point when the price and size of today's disk drives are taken into effect. So what's the benefit? Is it simply that the producers of said media want to controll its distribution? If so, well, its working: not only do I not re-distribute streaming media, I don't watch it myself.
I knew they were coming down, but I haven't seen them that low. Got a link?
Your example holds, if you assume you pick correctly on the first guess 50% of the time, which is a flawed assumption (unless the game show is rigged, of course)
Try looking at it this way: Monty knows which door the prize is behind. If your first pick is a door with no prize behind it, he can choose to open either of the other doors. If your first pick isn't the door with the prize behind it, he has to open the other door with no prize -- he doesn't have a choice. At the point where you pick a door (say door 1) and Monty is about to open a door there are three possibilities
Possibility 1: Prize is behind door 1: 50% chance Monty will open either
Possibility 2: Prize is behind door 2: 100% chance Monty will open door door 3. 0% chance Monty will open door 2
Possibility 3: Prize is behind door 3: 0% chance Monty will open door 3. 100% chance Monty will open door 2.
Each possibility has a 33% chance of happening. With Possibility 1, if you stay, you win and if you switch, you lose. With Possibility 2, if you stay, you lose and if you switch, you win. With Possibility 3, if you stay, you lose and if you switch, you win. Therefore the probability of switching and winning is 2/3.
Yeah I can tell the difference: it's in the price tag. These incremental releases keep the prices falling. To me, this release means that I am one step closer to getting the 800 Mhz processor I have my eyes on.
All capitilization of technology has done is sloooow it down.
Somehow, I don't think calling it 'unix' will make it evolve any faster...
One recent study, published in The Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, found that out of 132 cats that fell an average of 5.5 storeys, 90 per cent survived, including one that fell 45 storeys.
I like cats and all, but I found the mental picture I formed while reading this quite funny: Men dressed in white lab coats conducting an official study by throwing cats out windows to see if they'd survive, with another man with a clipboard and white lab coat standing on the ground tallying the results.
I can still remember teaching my brother how to use the word processor on our old Apple IIGS. He had started working on a document, and wanted to save it, so I showed him how to select 'save' from the menu. When prompted for a name, he asked what he should call the file. I told him to call it whatever he wanted. Thinking himself funny, he called it 'bob' After a few months of naming files that way, he wanted help opening a file that he created a while ago. We started the word processor and tried to open the file. We got to the directory where he had been saving stuff and found it full of 'names' He couldn't remember what he had named the file; was it frank, suzy, thomas, henry, etc? I can still remember his comment. "Oh, I guess that wasn't such a good idea."
My point here is that if you can't easily tell what a file is by looking at its name, the naming scheme is flawed. 8.3 can be restrictive in that manner, although the extreme other end (ie 'this file...foggy day.microsoft word') isn't that great either.
You're right, willmc got that part wrong. According to TFA, the moth "is sterile, but sexually active; it is designed to mate with wild relatives and eliminate their offspring."
No not really. In order to use a regular packet sniffer, you have to know the encryption key(s) and the network name, otherwise the radio card will drop the packets before they are passed along to your laptop.
Keep in mind WEP stands for "Wired Equivilancy Protocol"
Close, its actually "Wired Equivalent Privacy," but you have the right idea. It was only intended to be as secure as wire.
Not without customers they won't!
You're right. No one will jump on this willingly. But then the software vendors will insist that you uninstall the software and return all installation media to them (as the EULA allows). Then there will be many (unhappy) customers.
As if we couldn't guess...
Your spam message Dear Friend , Your email address has bee... decodes to:
First Post
I think it has something to do with the fact that with every Patent Pending article there are dozens of "I'm going to patent {something stupidly obvious} and you will all owe me money" posts. You post simply repeats (in concept anyway) what was posted numerous times before.
Greed.
It can be done.
There is no (real) consequence for a failed attempt.
Why not?
Not meaning to flame, but aren't you advocating groupthink? You are saying that to publicly question the current scientific majority is wrong. The scientific majority isn't always correct, and questioning it is what sparks further research that eventually proves one side or the other. Maybe I misunderstood you, but it seems like you are advocating censoring museums, by mandating what a museum can and cannot say.
60 minutes = 3600 seconds
6Mbits per second * 3600 seconds = 21600 Mbits
21600 Mbits / 8 = 2700 MBytes
need I go further