And then, digital TV is in my eyes a waste of bandwidth und is also harder to transmit and creating more interference and signal disturbance because of the high frequencies and the square nature of the signal (think Fourier here...).
Digital TV is not a waste of bandwidth. You can typically squeeze many digital stations into the bandwidth (in the proper sense of the term) into which one analog station will fit. This is true even when broadcasting digitally at very high quality (low compression).
Also, it is somewhat naive of you to think that just because a signal is digital it is represented electromagnetically by a square wave. The digital signal is actually encoded in something approximately resembling a sine wave, resulting in virtually no harmonics.
I do agree with you, though, that there are certain advantages to analog TV signals, not least the rawness of the signal resulting in lack of artefacts.
fuck off you damp little monkey queens and dumpster bot
This is *exactly* the kind of attitude I was talking about.
Originally, Card had hoped to have three books in the "Shadow" series (for which he still doesn't have a good overall name to reference it by). But somewhere while writing Shadow of the Hegemon, he realized that he needed to write another (like that's ever happened to a Card series before!) So, there will be an additional two novels in the series.
The economist is not a financial rag, but only those who have bothered to read it would know that it is a very general current affairs paper with a thoroughly enlightened editorial policy.
The economist is, in fact, the finest piece of journalism on the market today.
The Register... (which appears to be in the/. submissions killfile, but that's a different story)
How about this story on slashdot which contains no fewer than two links to the register, on this very issue (CPRM) as it happens. Better luck next time, while, ideut.
I'd like to know how they plan on storing the massive terabytes (petabytes?) of data at only $9M a year...
That's easy. The legislation offloads the responsibility of storing the information to the communication service providers. Whenever they get suspicious about someone, they ask for the logs on that person to be handed over. The huge expense of this stupidity will be the responsibility of the communications industry.
The Queen is an extremely important part of the British Constitution... I just wish the Queen would exercise some of her powers now, and thwart some of Blairs more outrageous suggestions
The whole point is that she doesn't have the powers you are claiming she does. It is agreed by everyone involved in the UK (note: you said Britain. Britain is an island, the UK is a Kingdom/Queendom) constitution that if she were to try and exercise the powers she supposedly has, those powers would instantly be removed. Effectively, then, she doesn't have those powers.
Please could someone rectify the negative moderation of the parent post (currently at 0:Troll) which makes a valid and correct point. It is important to distinguish between democracy and freedom. Democracy is merely a system where a country's population have a large say in how their country is run. Democracy says nothing about freedom. Freedom sometimes needs to be given a higher priority than democracy in order to limit tyranny of the masses.
This fact is especially clear in a country like the US where they have a written constitution. If any legislation violates the constitution it is found to be illegal. But when was the last time Americans voted on whether to keep the constitution? They don't need to ever vote to keep their constitution because even though it can get in the way of democracy (by stopping elected reps from passing certain laws) it is there to guarantee freedom.
Well, the Labour party hasn't announced their position on this yet. Currently these are just proposals made by the intelligence services. Intelligence services are always pushing for draconian powers. It is usually the job of the government to keep the extent of these powers sensible. The Labour Party and the Tories are both fairly bad at this.
On the one hand, we probably should consider all uses of public networks to be public information anyway. On the other hand, this law would mean a lot more than that. It would mean all communication service providers are obliged to keep their logs for seven years. That is a massive affront to my liberty (more precisely the liberty of CSPs). I don't think I am prepared to accept that law, but as I'm never going to run a CSP, I will never have an opportunity to break that law. It still sucks though.
Slashdot Mirror
OK, Alice, let's.
this is a test
fucking monkey boy
Is there any point at all to your sig?
I don't understand your sig. Could you please explain it?
Static web content only?
Heh heh.. looks like I've got a stalker.
squiggleslash is a naughty naughty troll.
Digital TV is not a waste of bandwidth. You can typically squeeze many digital stations into the bandwidth (in the proper sense of the term) into which one analog station will fit. This is true even when broadcasting digitally at very high quality (low compression).
Also, it is somewhat naive of you to think that just because a signal is digital it is represented electromagnetically by a square wave. The digital signal is actually encoded in something approximately resembling a sine wave, resulting in virtually no harmonics.
I do agree with you, though, that there are certain advantages to analog TV signals, not least the rawness of the signal resulting in lack of artefacts.
Thanks very much, AC. What is your opinion on the thrilling developments in American TV's regulatory regime?
This link works without requiring any registration.
This is *exactly* the kind of attitude I was talking about.
Originally, Card had hoped to have three books in the "Shadow" series (for which he still doesn't have a good overall name to reference it by). But somewhere while writing Shadow of the Hegemon, he realized that he needed to write another (like that's ever happened to a Card series before!) So, there will be an additional two novels in the series.
Thanks,
Ideut
The economist is, in fact, the finest piece of journalism on the market today.
Please do NOT say "could care less" when you mean "couldn't care less". That is all.
How about this story on slashdot which contains no fewer than two links to the register, on this very issue (CPRM) as it happens. Better luck next time, while, ideut.
Ideut, your keystrokes are logged on a typewriter by the ribbon.
poo
That's easy. The legislation offloads the responsibility of storing the information to the communication service providers. Whenever they get suspicious about someone, they ask for the logs on that person to be handed over. The huge expense of this stupidity will be the responsibility of the communications industry.
..which included the desire to take away the right to own material property. Yep, they've come a long way. They just haven't come far enough.
I just wish the Queen would exercise some of her powers now, and thwart some of Blairs more outrageous suggestions
The whole point is that she doesn't have the powers you are claiming she does. It is agreed by everyone involved in the UK (note: you said Britain. Britain is an island, the UK is a Kingdom/Queendom) constitution that if she were to try and exercise the powers she supposedly has, those powers would instantly be removed. Effectively, then, she doesn't have those powers.
This fact is especially clear in a country like the US where they have a written constitution. If any legislation violates the constitution it is found to be illegal. But when was the last time Americans voted on whether to keep the constitution? They don't need to ever vote to keep their constitution because even though it can get in the way of democracy (by stopping elected reps from passing certain laws) it is there to guarantee freedom.
Well, the Labour party hasn't announced their position on this yet. Currently these are just proposals made by the intelligence services. Intelligence services are always pushing for draconian powers. It is usually the job of the government to keep the extent of these powers sensible. The Labour Party and the Tories are both fairly bad at this.
On the one hand, we probably should consider all uses of public networks to be public information anyway. On the other hand, this law would mean a lot more than that. It would mean all communication service providers are obliged to keep their logs for seven years. That is a massive affront to my liberty (more precisely the liberty of CSPs). I don't think I am prepared to accept that law, but as I'm never going to run a CSP, I will never have an opportunity to break that law. It still sucks though.
I think it's time for you to admit you don't know what you're talking about.
In that case, you're going to have to be told. Alice can not send Bob a message which Bob can read but not remember. It's as simple as that.
However, the original post also missed the point as we are talking about watermarking here, not encryption.