"Kiddie shows"? Hello? Have you ever
actually watched any anime other than
the pathetically watered down versions that
make it to Saturday morning cartoons? Even
Cartoon Network's anime selection would do
to demonstrate the "maturity" of anime
(though they do focus on more of an all-ages
audience rather than any strongly adult
(not H!) themes).
The medium does not dictate the content,
despite what our corporate masters would
have us think.
C'mon, you meant this as a rhetorical
question, right?
What do you *think* the slashdot crowd will
respond to a question like that, when we
overwhelmingly loathe even having companies
able to correlate such trivalities as our
names and email addresses?
Offensive... I think that makes a good
word. I find it offensive in the extreme
that anyone but me profit from my personal
information (and by that, I don't mean I
would agree to it even if I *could* profit
from it). Selling information about me
violates an absolute of the idea of
posessions in general - If I don't "posess"
my own information, what the hell *do* I
own?
data on a DVD-R can't be accidentally or intentionally erased (luser, virus)
Y'know, I've always wondered about this...
Let's say I have a popular program I release
on CD (pressed, not burned). If I included
code in the program to detect a CD-R drive and,
if found, attempt to overwrite the TOC on the
CD, could this actually work as a "copy
protection" technique?
Aside from the questionable legality, it seems
to me that, if the drive contained a CD-R disk,
it would destroy it, whereas it would not affect
a "normal" CD.
Anyone have any insight on this? Would it
depend entirely on the drive's firmware? Can
a program more easily detect a CD-R than by
trying to destroy it and see if it works?
Aside from the possible reduction of our
fair-use rights, I don't really see this as
all that bad.
Personally, I watch roughly two hours of
television per *week*. Since any pay-to-view
pricing structure would realistically have to
let the majority of TV viewers (up to 10-12
hours each day) pay little more than they do
with a flat rate, my cable bill should
plummet.
I too use the same security philosophy (as the
post to which you responded), that anyone who
can get by my firewall basically has the run
of my LAN. I don't excactly open up all my
internal machines, but I don't lock them down
to unuseability, either.
Some people consider this a Very Bad Idea. I
understand the down side (namely, if someone
gets past the firewall, game over), but look at
it this way - Literally every day, someone
discovers a new security vulnerability.
Now, I can either spend a few hours every day
researching these and deciding if they apply
to any of my machines, or I can just skim for
the really bad ones and those affecting the very
few programs my firewall runs (Basically just a 2.4.x Linux kernel and an sshd... Fairly easy to
watch for updates).
Also, you may want to consider the type of
network involved... I refer to a home LAN
consisting of a few Linux boxen, a W2K box
(face it, through no fault of open source,
many webpages have far too many IE-isms to work
properly in Mozilla/Konqueror/Opera/whatever),
and a networked printer. My only "users",
(aside from myself, the SO and a few friends),
only surf the web, check email,and occasionally
ask me to install a game for them. Aside from
my file server, I could completely reinstall
any box I have in an hour. I suspect many/.'ers
fall into this same category.
Incidentally, I do recommend (and use) *one*
internal security measure, more of a CYA than
actual "security"... I keep *everything* beyond
base OS installations in a mirrored encrypted
filesystem my file server. If ever Big Bro
comes knocking and rounds up my PCs, they can
ask nicely for the passwords I just happen to
have forgotten, but good luck otherwise.
Although I really do not grasp the need to pay
a company to design spreadsheet layouts, you
seem to have only one choice... Play ball, and
pass the cost on to your customers. If you really
fit a niche market, they'll have no choice (all
part of the game... Remember, that extortion money
works *for* you as well as against you, by giving
you a virtual monopoly).
I see a *HUGE* problem with requiring licensure
to practice software development, aside from the
legal ramifications on open source work.
I do mostly low level coding, firmware, device
drivers, things of that nature. I can interface
with anything I can get a spec for.
I do not, however, know much at all about
application development. I do not know much
about writing an OS. I do not know much about
game development. Yes, I can understand the
concepts involved, but that differs from having
the familiarity required to do those things
with confidence in my abilities.
I agree that making software less of an "art"
would help large corporations take fewer risks
in hiring coders. While not a big fan of "That
which benefits M$ benefits America", I can also
see the side benefit of helping to separate the
real developers from the web weenies.
Until we have only one platform, however, with
only one API, only one programming language,
and only one conceptual model (ie, OO, which
I personally dislike), software development
*MUST* remain an art.
Just to save everyone the trouble of visiting
this site and having to set up the nice
handy custom-realplayer-interface it forces
you to use, I will describe the sound.
Better yet, I will tell you how to hear it
without even having a computer.
Get a can of hairspray.
Press the nozzle.
Cool, eh? Well, kudos to the marketing
genius who thought to patent the sound of
using an aerosol can.
I find a particular comment in the BBC article
somewhat curious... It claims that the orbits of
the planets in our own solar system do not seem
to exhibit any effects comparable to that of the
four probes in question:
"It would be apparent in the orbits of the
planets around the Sun - which it is not".
Now, someone please correct me if I have this
wrong, but don't estimates of the physical
properties' of planets *derive* from the behavior
of those planets under the assumptions of our best current understanding of gravity?
So, how can we claim that the planets do not
seem affected by this "mystery force"? If we
use the orbital radius and centripetal acceleration of a planet to calculate its mass,
we can't then use that calculated mass to "prove"
that the THEORY of gravitational attraction as we
know it applies perfectly.
Ah, someone gets it. Thank you, I thought the
rest of the world had simply forgotten the point
of buying "stuff" : Because we WANT it.
I don't care HOW many ads a site throws at me,
and in fact I will aggressively try to block them
with filtering proxies (adzapper works simply
wonderfully), if a product doesn't interest me,
I usually won't click through. With one exception... namely, I will occasionally click on
a banner at sites I frequent, regardless of what
the ad says, for the sake of the site operator.
Click the banner, immediately go back.
I do not suspect my habits in this area as even
remotely unusual. So, why do advertisers keep trying? Sure, let 'em use full-screen popup
ads. We'll find a way around that as well.
Perhaps someone can explain this to me. Yes, I read the referenced articles, and think I have a pretty good grasp of what they intend to do. But I have two serious technical problems with the entire scheme.
First, it sounds like the only way to force someone to use these "features" would consist of having a compliant BIOS, OS, *and* filesystem. That alone seems to insure that we can get around it.
More importantly, though, even if my assumption above turns out wrong, why couldn't someone create a ramdisk, copy whatever they want to it (copyrighted or not), then save that ramdisk as an image file with the copyable-flag set? Or for that matter, why wouldn't that same idea work with *any* mounted loopback filesystem? as long as " I " created and have copy permission on the "real" file (as the disk sees it), the contents of that file should not matter.
Any ideas? Please, I would really like to hear the flaws with my reasoning.
Assuming you didn't intend this as a troll, I would like to point out a flaw with your reasoning... The entire Linux community (which arguably makes up the majority of slashdot readers) believes in free software. Piracy? What the hell can we pirate? One of the two dozen commercial apps released "experimentally" for Linux? Yeah, okay. Developing software does *not* take a lot of money. We have a lot of high-quality programs already, thanks to people in the community spending time to write them. And their use doesn't involve "stealing" anything.
Can we consider login passwords for our local
ISP's as "access control mechanisms"?
If so, then checking the "remember my password" option for the windoze dialup connection dialog would constitute circumventing an access control
mechanism.
Sorry Grandma, you'll just have to memorize that
20 digit random string your ISP assigned you.
Slashdot Mirror
"Kiddie shows"? Hello? Have you ever actually watched any anime other than the pathetically watered down versions that make it to Saturday morning cartoons? Even Cartoon Network's anime selection would do to demonstrate the "maturity" of anime (though they do focus on more of an all-ages audience rather than any strongly adult (not H!) themes).
The medium does not dictate the content, despite what our corporate masters would have us think.
C'mon, you meant this as a rhetorical question, right?
What do you *think* the slashdot crowd will respond to a question like that, when we overwhelmingly loathe even having companies able to correlate such trivalities as our names and email addresses?
Offensive... I think that makes a good word. I find it offensive in the extreme that anyone but me profit from my personal information (and by that, I don't mean I would agree to it even if I *could* profit from it). Selling information about me violates an absolute of the idea of posessions in general - If I don't "posess" my own information, what the hell *do* I own?
data on a DVD-R can't be accidentally or intentionally erased (luser, virus)
Y'know, I've always wondered about this...
Let's say I have a popular program I release on CD (pressed, not burned). If I included code in the program to detect a CD-R drive and, if found, attempt to overwrite the TOC on the CD, could this actually work as a "copy protection" technique?
Aside from the questionable legality, it seems to me that, if the drive contained a CD-R disk, it would destroy it, whereas it would not affect a "normal" CD.
Anyone have any insight on this? Would it depend entirely on the drive's firmware? Can a program more easily detect a CD-R than by trying to destroy it and see if it works?
Just a thought...
Aside from the possible reduction of our fair-use rights, I don't really see this as all that bad.
Personally, I watch roughly two hours of television per *week*. Since any pay-to-view pricing structure would realistically have to let the majority of TV viewers (up to 10-12 hours each day) pay little more than they do with a flat rate, my cable bill should plummet.
I too use the same security philosophy (as the post to which you responded), that anyone who can get by my firewall basically has the run of my LAN. I don't excactly open up all my internal machines, but I don't lock them down to unuseability, either.
/.'ers
fall into this same category.
Some people consider this a Very Bad Idea. I understand the down side (namely, if someone gets past the firewall, game over), but look at it this way - Literally every day, someone discovers a new security vulnerability. Now, I can either spend a few hours every day researching these and deciding if they apply to any of my machines, or I can just skim for the really bad ones and those affecting the very few programs my firewall runs (Basically just a 2.4.x Linux kernel and an sshd... Fairly easy to watch for updates).
Also, you may want to consider the type of network involved... I refer to a home LAN consisting of a few Linux boxen, a W2K box (face it, through no fault of open source, many webpages have far too many IE-isms to work properly in Mozilla/Konqueror/Opera/whatever), and a networked printer. My only "users", (aside from myself, the SO and a few friends), only surf the web, check email,and occasionally ask me to install a game for them. Aside from my file server, I could completely reinstall any box I have in an hour. I suspect many
Incidentally, I do recommend (and use) *one* internal security measure, more of a CYA than actual "security"... I keep *everything* beyond base OS installations in a mirrored encrypted filesystem my file server. If ever Big Bro comes knocking and rounds up my PCs, they can ask nicely for the passwords I just happen to have forgotten, but good luck otherwise.
Although I really do not grasp the need to pay a company to design spreadsheet layouts, you seem to have only one choice... Play ball, and pass the cost on to your customers. If you really fit a niche market, they'll have no choice (all part of the game... Remember, that extortion money works *for* you as well as against you, by giving you a virtual monopoly).
Personally, I would love to see HP5 as an eBook.
I suspect it would set a somewhat unique precedent in recent history - You would see pirate *printed* copies more popular than electronic ones.
Perhaps just what we need to finally send the message "Don't blame the geeks, blame human nature."
I see a *HUGE* problem with requiring licensure to practice software development, aside from the legal ramifications on open source work.
I do mostly low level coding, firmware, device drivers, things of that nature. I can interface with anything I can get a spec for.
I do not, however, know much at all about application development. I do not know much about writing an OS. I do not know much about game development. Yes, I can understand the concepts involved, but that differs from having the familiarity required to do those things with confidence in my abilities.
I agree that making software less of an "art" would help large corporations take fewer risks in hiring coders. While not a big fan of "That which benefits M$ benefits America", I can also see the side benefit of helping to separate the real developers from the web weenies.
Until we have only one platform, however, with only one API, only one programming language, and only one conceptual model (ie, OO, which I personally dislike), software development *MUST* remain an art.
Just to save everyone the trouble of visiting this site and having to set up the nice handy custom-realplayer-interface it forces you to use, I will describe the sound.
Better yet, I will tell you how to hear it without even having a computer.
Get a can of hairspray.
Press the nozzle.
Cool, eh? Well, kudos to the marketing genius who thought to patent the sound of using an aerosol can.
I find a particular comment in the BBC article somewhat curious... It claims that the orbits of the planets in our own solar system do not seem to exhibit any effects comparable to that of the four probes in question:
"It would be apparent in the orbits of the planets around the Sun - which it is not".
Now, someone please correct me if I have this wrong, but don't estimates of the physical properties' of planets *derive* from the behavior of those planets under the assumptions of our best current understanding of gravity?
So, how can we claim that the planets do not seem affected by this "mystery force"? If we use the orbital radius and centripetal acceleration of a planet to calculate its mass, we can't then use that calculated mass to "prove" that the THEORY of gravitational attraction as we know it applies perfectly.
Ah, someone gets it. Thank you, I thought the rest of the world had simply forgotten the point of buying "stuff" : Because we WANT it.
I don't care HOW many ads a site throws at me, and in fact I will aggressively try to block them with filtering proxies (adzapper works simply wonderfully), if a product doesn't interest me, I usually won't click through. With one exception... namely, I will occasionally click on a banner at sites I frequent, regardless of what the ad says, for the sake of the site operator. Click the banner, immediately go back.
I do not suspect my habits in this area as even remotely unusual. So, why do advertisers keep trying? Sure, let 'em use full-screen popup ads. We'll find a way around that as well.
we lived. bummer.
Perhaps someone can explain this to me. Yes, I read the referenced articles, and think I have a pretty good grasp of what they intend to do. But I have two serious technical problems with the entire scheme.
First, it sounds like the only way to force someone to use these "features" would consist of having a compliant BIOS, OS, *and* filesystem. That alone seems to insure that we can get around it.
More importantly, though, even if my assumption above turns out wrong, why couldn't someone create a ramdisk, copy whatever they want to it (copyrighted or not), then save that ramdisk as an image file with the copyable-flag set? Or for that matter, why wouldn't that same idea work with *any* mounted loopback filesystem? as long as " I " created and have copy permission on the "real" file (as the disk sees it), the contents of that file should not matter.
Any ideas? Please, I would really like to hear the flaws with my reasoning.
Assuming you didn't intend this as a troll, I would like to point out a flaw with your reasoning... The entire Linux community (which arguably makes up the majority of slashdot readers) believes in free software. Piracy? What the hell can we pirate? One of the two dozen commercial apps released "experimentally" for Linux? Yeah, okay. Developing software does *not* take a lot of money. We have a lot of high-quality programs already, thanks to people in the community spending time to write them. And their use doesn't involve "stealing" anything.
Can we consider login passwords for our local
ISP's as "access control mechanisms"?
If so, then checking the "remember my password" option for the windoze dialup connection dialog would constitute circumventing an access control
mechanism.
Sorry Grandma, you'll just have to memorize that
20 digit random string your ISP assigned you.