MS thinks that printer Manufacture's are going to incorperate this and not pay adobe for their RIP
Wow, I bet this will lead to "Windows CE for Printers." If you think of a printer as a toaster, then you might think WinCE is overkill. But if you think of a printer as a network appliance, then WinCE makes a perfect platform for Metro and remote job management and maintenance. They might even add a fancy touch-screen color display, which would be SO much better than "Ld Ltr MP".
And it makes a perfect platform for secure computing and document DRM.
Seems like the entertainment industry's one hand doesn't know what the other is doing.
It's much easier than that.
Distributors want the internet shut down; artists want to use it. *AA represent the distributors, so it's no surprise what they're doing. But the artists are going the other way, and that includes looking into BitTorrent.
perhaps AMD should instead only sell > $600 high end CPUs and not sell budget range CPUs at all?
That's exactly what they should do, and Intel too. When the high-end people buy the high-end chips, they release their ex-high-end machines into the used market. People who want low-end machines can then pick those up. When Intel and AMD compete in the low end market, used machines become harder to get rid of (decreasing sales of the high-end), plus it puts more machines in the trash.
For 3D games, I bet main memory is wasted on a duplicate copy of the textures. i.e. Textures are loaded into main mem, then uploaded to the card. If it weren't for that, a 128MB system could keep a 512MB card happy.
On the contrary, they understand exactly what customers want -- newer, more craptastic phones. "10% more reliable" doesn't sell, but "10% more colors" does.
Curing sleep would give me 33% more usable time, and is much easier than curing age. There also isn't any problem with overpopulation, or other "moral" arguements.
You can indeed do whatever you want with the slug of plastic you purchased. But you have no right to copy the music; that right is owned by someone else. These technologies simply bring common practice into sync with the law.
Ok, I just R'd t FA, and they actually make my point:
[Granted patents] will provide ironclad protection for subsequent investment in the invention.
Ironclad? This is the problem - once a bad patent is granted, it becomes gospel, and cannot be changed. So we need better examiners, right?
Patent examinations--and examiners--will never be perfect. Therefore, while we cannot hope to have a system in which no "bad" patents are ever issued, we can strive for a system that produces fewer bad patents.
So if we're guaranteed bad patents no matter what, then patents should not give "ironclad" protection. We need a lighter system, not a heavier one. Grant every patent without review, and review them thouroughly only when actual conflict occurs. Ideally the patent office itself would help with the review, holding down costs for small inventors.
The author wanted a cheaper system; my idea costs nothing at all for new patents, encouraging more small or independent inventors to file, and would even encourage people to file obvious ideas simply to get them logged.
The author wanted higher quality patents; my idea encourages all knowledge to be filed, making a quick Google of the patent database tell you whether your idea is unique. Since most people don't really want to waste their time with legal hassles, they'll use this to refine the patent before ever submitting it.
Two of the ideas are already sunk, as they'd require the patent office to spend even more money on reviewing patents. But since they're already out of money, there's nothing more they can do there.
I personally think the patent system is too heavy-weight. A patent should be nothing more than a claim, and it should be granted immediately without review. If you need to protect your invention, you go to court, and point to your claim. At that point, prior art and prior patents are finally investigated. If your patent is useless, it's stamped Common Knowledge, and becomes free. If solid, then you win the case.
As I understand it, this is mostly the way the patent system works now. So what's the problem?
Article seemed near sighted. If I peer into the future, I see DRM screwing up everything. It already has; wide-area wireless internet radio would have been the biggest and best thing possible.
But peering around that, the coolest radio gadget would be one that tune tunes *every* station in the area simultaneously, and stores it all. Forget about scheduling a recording; if you discover something interesting, you can go back and listen to the whole thing. Then go even farther back, and listen to the previous year's worth of episodes.
Toss in some heavy processing and an internet connection, and it can identify every song, speech, and show as it plays, and you could listen by genre across every station in your area. But if you have internet, you have internet radio, and this whole thing becomes useless.
Kodak DC200, was state of the art once. No wait, it was a toy back then too. Which is why I was so suprised that the prints turned out so well. Prints off my brother's 6MP DSLR look really nice too, much better than my crap 35MM photos. In other words, good digital fotomat prints are better than bad film prints.
But my point is, any digital fotomat will deliver 90% of the quality you need. A personal printer is only useful if you want that last 10%. Or to (possibly) save some money.
I wouldn't be too quick to disparage fotomats either; they did an amazing job with shots from my old 1-megapixel camera. I've no doubt a pro can do better, but that's true of all things, and fotomats are good enough for most purposes anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
And it makes a perfect platform for secure computing and document DRM.
Distributors want the internet shut down; artists want to use it. *AA represent the distributors, so it's no surprise what they're doing. But the artists are going the other way, and that includes looking into BitTorrent.
Ah yes, here we go:x t
http://www.chaosmatrix.org/library/humor/pshift.t
Looks like this guy has a newer version, I don't see a "bioinformatics" option.
Just do it in software:m
http://biphome.spray.se/gunnart/video/deshaker.ht
I've done bike rides and kung fu competions with this. Works great, but takes lots of CPU.
WWDC = What Would Dave Compute?
I dunno who Dave is, might be a 2001 reference.
Yay! Woo!
Oh sorry, that's "Woo! Yay!" I'm just too excited.
For 3D games, I bet main memory is wasted on a duplicate copy of the textures. i.e. Textures are loaded into main mem, then uploaded to the card. If it weren't for that, a 128MB system could keep a 512MB card happy.
No. Your Viewer License doesn't allow transcoding, only time-shifting. You can watch it once, then you must delete it.
I can't be bothered to read it. Is there a review of your reviews?
Computer + webcam + vOICe = something you can use in the real world, not just computerized maps. This has been around for a few years now.
Curing sleep would give me 33% more usable time, and is much easier than curing age. There also isn't any problem with overpopulation, or other "moral" arguements.
Need the dubyas in there.
http://www.cappuccinopc.com/
Thanks .. Now could you explain "asshat"? I've never seen a hat for an ass, so I can't tell if it's good or bad. :(
Oops, I'm OT. Oh well, I've got ACs to burn.
No, cuz Viagra works with a completely different kind of 'installer'.
And your sig is largely concerned with itself, not hobbits.
You can indeed do whatever you want with the slug of plastic you purchased. But you have no right to copy the music; that right is owned by someone else. These technologies simply bring common practice into sync with the law.
I usually see it spelt "Usians" or "USians", probably pronounced "oozhins". I've also seen "United States of Vespuccia", FWIW.
Well, you can pass this off as a PDA, since it really is one. Prolly has more gaming horsepower too.
Ok, I just R'd t FA, and they actually make my point:
Ironclad? This is the problem - once a bad patent is granted, it becomes gospel, and cannot be changed. So we need better examiners, right?
So if we're guaranteed bad patents no matter what, then patents should not give "ironclad" protection. We need a lighter system, not a heavier one. Grant every patent without review, and review them thouroughly only when actual conflict occurs. Ideally the patent office itself would help with the review, holding down costs for small inventors.
The author wanted a cheaper system; my idea costs nothing at all for new patents, encouraging more small or independent inventors to file, and would even encourage people to file obvious ideas simply to get them logged.
The author wanted higher quality patents; my idea encourages all knowledge to be filed, making a quick Google of the patent database tell you whether your idea is unique. Since most people don't really want to waste their time with legal hassles, they'll use this to refine the patent before ever submitting it.
Two of the ideas are already sunk, as they'd require the patent office to spend even more money on reviewing patents. But since they're already out of money, there's nothing more they can do there.
I personally think the patent system is too heavy-weight. A patent should be nothing more than a claim, and it should be granted immediately without review. If you need to protect your invention, you go to court, and point to your claim. At that point, prior art and prior patents are finally investigated. If your patent is useless, it's stamped Common Knowledge, and becomes free. If solid, then you win the case.
As I understand it, this is mostly the way the patent system works now. So what's the problem?
Article seemed near sighted. If I peer into the future, I see DRM screwing up everything. It already has; wide-area wireless internet radio would have been the biggest and best thing possible.
But peering around that, the coolest radio gadget would be one that tune tunes *every* station in the area simultaneously, and stores it all. Forget about scheduling a recording; if you discover something interesting, you can go back and listen to the whole thing. Then go even farther back, and listen to the previous year's worth of episodes.
Toss in some heavy processing and an internet connection, and it can identify every song, speech, and show as it plays, and you could listen by genre across every station in your area. But if you have internet, you have internet radio, and this whole thing becomes useless.
Kodak DC200, was state of the art once. No wait, it was a toy back then too. Which is why I was so suprised that the prints turned out so well. Prints off my brother's 6MP DSLR look really nice too, much better than my crap 35MM photos. In other words, good digital fotomat prints are better than bad film prints.
But my point is, any digital fotomat will deliver 90% of the quality you need. A personal printer is only useful if you want that last 10%. Or to (possibly) save some money.
You'd lose. The PTC is not a person, but a group of people. One person may have taped the show, but he's sharing it with the other members of the PTC.
I wouldn't be too quick to disparage fotomats either; they did an amazing job with shots from my old 1-megapixel camera. I've no doubt a pro can do better, but that's true of all things, and fotomats are good enough for most purposes anyway.