lets ignore the wooden acting, bland direction and painful script for now. All the actors are in focus. They all have competently applied make up. The picture isn't grainy. You can't see any plywood poking out from behind the fairely extensive sets. The costumes look realistic. The audio is fine: you can hear the actors' lines without the music, sound effects, or ambiant noise drowning them out. There's a score. The custom 3-d modelling is competent. You can't see bits of camera equipment or sound booms in the frame, and so on....
You are comparing Mission to Mars to the original theatrical release of Star Wars aren't you?
What this guy has done is create a service whereby he can onsell his asset at a low price point. Not really that stupid after all.
The same rules apply in the virtual world. You've got an area you call your own, the resources on said area are also your own. You could try to get a return on your investment by holding these resources until the time is right to sell, sell off portions of the resource or do nothing and be happy spending money.
Would you live on a farm that produced no product? If there were natural resources such as gems, petroleum or even attractions like waterfalls wouldn't you be at least thinking about ways to make money on them? Sure, there are some that would let people see the attraction for free, ignore the value of minerals that must be harvested in crude ways or refuse to let people shoot their animals and hook their fish for any reason, especially for money.
It's exactly like buying an island and turning a third into a resort, a third into destination spots (businesses, pristine land, room for activities) and leaving the remainder to your own enjoyment.
I mean, this guy does hunt on his own virtual island right?
So who do I call if my computer BSODs and I'm using all certified drivers?
Really, how many times does your XP, 2000 or 2003 computer blue screen. I'm no fanboy but I know how to handle my computer. The thing that you, and everyone else, fails to see is that you not only must use 100% certified drivers but you must also use software that uses the MSI installation process. I assume that their definition of supported software only comes from the top (and oldest) developers (Symantec, Microsoft themselves, others). This however is why you see some hardware developers distributing drivers with MSI packages that install additional software - for better compliance.
Trust me, the third thing you installed likely violated this agreement. Some Microsoft software even violates this protocol. Using codecs that aren't kosher will even violate this rule.
Even still, how are you blue screening 2000 or XP? They are not the greatest thing since sliced bread but you have to be an idiot to be breaking them today. I sure do crash a lot of programs and lock up the computer(s) from time to time but have had a retail XP home machine blue screen free since I bought it more than a year and a half ago. I don't get how people are being forced to re-install every six months or year. I've been using this "budget" PC for all this time how it shipped from the factory (with their crap) and about hundreds of applications installed since, with many being removed over time and plenty of updates; in some cases multiple versions of the same program have been installed when needed. CYGWIN, and plenty of other GPL or otherwise "free" software and lots of cheap hardware (ATI TV Wonder!) to boot. I've run VMWare with BSD and Linux inside, swapped out and replaced a few things and still no problems. (Knock on wood of course, but it isn't all luck).
Sometimes the solution is to go back to typewriters, calculators, newspapers, radio and mail service.
Any supplements or updates to the Software, including without limitation, any (if any) service packs or hot fixes provided to you after the expiration of the ninety day Limited Warranty period are not covered by any warranty or condition, express, implied or statutory.
Doesn't say anything about certified drivers, or any drivers. They are covering their asses in case of Windows Update fucks a home user but if you've got a support agreement with Microsoft (likely for Windows 2003 at this point only) you are covered.
Don't forget that this includes approved software that uses MSI to install software and not any other process. I wish someone who has worked at Microsoft or someone who has actually used Windows 200x server products in a critical environment could back me up... but this *is* Slashdot.
I've always said surfing the web with IE is like going around sticking your dick in people without a rubber... eventually you are going to get something.
(off-topic, forgive me...)
Nothing is safe anymore. Sex became scary and now looking at porn is going to give me a virus or some other sort of infection that isn't easy to clear up.
There is one thing you all keep leaving out about certified drivers:
Without them you aren't guaranteed support from Microsoft.
If you are running machines with all certified drivers and WMI/MSI installed applications then Microsoft will be right there with you until the problem is solved. You won't find it written anywhere but Microsoft gurantees that you're machine will not crash (BSOD) if you use certified drivers and MSI installed software. At home this isn't possible, but in some environments it is possible (and a good idea in other places).
In a way you are locked in to what Microsoft has approved, but if they've approved it then the problem is theirs to fix - not yours. Good luck meeting those two requirements, but if you can: hold them to it.
Their true cost of a web-enabled phone is often well over $100, but the true cost is hidden somewhere in the 1 to 2 year contract with the provider.
And there lies the problem of trying to improve the less fortunate from a 'techie' standpoint. The idea of a "cheap" phone or other device they can "own" is pretty straightforward. The problem is as you stated, you don't own anything and are doing nothing more than begging for their service.
When they give you that fancy $300-500 phone for less than one hundred dollars they have to lock you into the contract to pay for the equipment. None of these companies are worried that you'll leave for another service a year down the line because of any natural competition. They are afraid of you leaving with what is essentially their phone. They haven't finished paying for it yet.
As an aside I see a major problem with mobile phone services in America. They are still tied to the phones. Consumers have come to expect that their carrier will supply them with a phone or that the carrier will sell them one (cheap). This was the strategy of Cellular phone companies like Ameritech. Then there was a large revolution in digital phone services with Qualcomm offering phones that really were $100 and way better. Upstarts like GTE were offering better, digital (PCS) services for nothing and no strings.
Overnight the old cellular companies were bought out, swallowed up, renamed or reformed. Everything was digital and things got way better. Now you could get the web, e-mail and text messages. Soon you could be sending photos! Suddenly major phone manufacturers started making phones with way too much jazz and now they are finally using that power. It's great, but there is a side effect. We are back to the old system. Sprint, Cingular, whomever is giving away phones for complex, costly contracts to pay for those phones. The digital phone revolution failed.
Something tangible (which may not be this $100 laptop) that we can give, instead of a service we can offer, makes a lot more sense. It only makes sense to develop a product that can be donated and left alone to flourish and then maybe bought later down the road. Hopefully a $100 laptop can get other governments to promise a PC for each child. Once they have that we can offer things like mobile phone services - but people have to start somewhere.
Don't get me wrong, most of the content I watch is Xvid files (that I'm not paying a dime for) or "homemade" DVD+R movies.
I just think it would be great to use the products in place to sell videos online. Every certified divx player has the ability to use their (evil?) DRM technology - now where is the content?
The reason this works is because it was the same thing that was happening online. Not more than an hour or so after a show aired you were starting to see torrents for VCD formatted shows and later an HDTV MPEG4. The main distributors were shut down but some of us downloaded them all.
I watched enough shows and had no interest in Lost. After the season was over I had time to catch up and watched them all (24?) in about three or four days. Now I'm hooked. I got the DVD and now am watching the shows live on HD. Now the problem is I'm missing another show. I've got dual tuner recorder but more services would be great.
I want to see all the networks do this. I've got a certified Divx player (Philips DVP642) that has a DRM passphrase and no content to buy for it, except porn and instructional videos (about sailboating). When can I see sales of full size (ie: progressive, high resolution) shows? I'd even deal with a few ads, like one in the start and one at the end.
Apple forced other unlikely candidates into selling music online (Walmart), what about video?
Well we can only hope that it will leave Google leaner and meaner and then the feature requests will roll in. Then when a PIM is good enough to enter the suite maybe Google will tweak it again and then we'll have the Office killer.
I've never had the great experience of using Outlook and/or Exchange; but it must be tackled to replace Office in many environments.
Re:A giant THANKS! to the IMDb people.
on
IMDb Turns 15
·
· Score: 1
May they continue to provide such a useful service for years to come.
Bad news, since this story is one the Slashdot front page, IMDb will soon be bought by Google.
We developed the Internet for speech and no country without our level of speech should control a major portion of its operations. The problem is that if we don't start rolling out Internet2 then we don't have leg to stand on when it comes to solutions.
I only say develop an alternative to HTTP because I would assume that they want a different protocol and port number because who wants accidentally hit an American site?
It's more like: we are watching the ball and you want to take it to play with it. Why should we let you go break it when we have watched it faithfully this long? Besides, you play by different, more restrictive rules in some cases. Those rules jeopardize the ball.
I am just trying to play devil's advocate in the first place with my response, but I like your idea. The idea that they were a divergent group in the evolutionary chain is likely.
Is there any chance that they could have been H.sapiens and at one time they were numerous and now just a recessive trait?
The thing is, other countries *have* built their own networks. Or did you think the US was running around the world installing fiber and cable for everyone??
Insightful?
I'm talking about what Bush would call: The Global TCP/IP Network, the Internet. Developed by DARPA as DARPANET, and so the story goes. The great thing about networking in general is that now the lines are laid they can just run both or either or even layer theirs into ours.
The cable is theirs but the "Internet" belongs to everyone given to them by the United States Department of Defense more or less. All of the technologies and so forth belong to the DoD, but America is the country that has made it all possible. Many people wrote about the same idea but the American tax payer made it all possible. (See: Al Gore)
If you sampled 100 people, what is the chance that you will get one diminutive person, let alone 20?
Depends on where you do the sampling. In Finland or an Amish country and it could be higher (Cartilage-hair hypoplasia) because these groups don't date outside of their groups enough (genetic shift) to make these "rare" exceptions rare anymore.
If you had a group that lived alone you could get a "tribe" of little people, but they would still be human.
These countries want to be able to control the Internet (at least within their borders) themselves. They want to engage in suppression of free speech, and create impediments to global commerce.
Well, then let them build their own network! No, being serious here - there is a way to solve all of this. Someone needs to develop their own DNS-like system and while they are at it develop a alternative to HTTP (because this is what we are really talking about here isn't it folks, "teh web"). When they get this new system up and running they can just go ahead and run it on our TCP/IP networks if they'd like (for a fee). By no means however is this going to take DNS control from us here in the states, ours would just exist along side "theirs".
It's possible, so these people should stop bitching.
Then again you would need to get American software companies like Microsoft to ship modified software to you specially because everything in it relies on DNS today (Active Directory can't work without it) and you would need to change a lot of other things, but it's possible.
You can love or hate the US and the current administration, but over the last two-plus centuries, pray tell what other major country has done more to promote free speech?
Well, I don't know about this part of the post. I hate the administration and I don't think they are doing a damn thing for free speech (remember the loyalty oath to see a Bush speech and USAPATRIOT) but I love America and what it stands for and I think only we should be in control for the reason you stated above - some regimes want to censor the Internet.
What scares me is that giving the UN control of the DNS servers will allow people from outside of America control an American's inherent right to free speech. If I put up a site that dishes on the Queen of England then she can petition the UN to revoke my domain name. If I wanted to put a site up called BRANDNAME-SUCKS.COM WIPO might close me down.
It isn't that I don't trust the UN - I just don't trust anyone I can't "see" in an American court.
I got one off of Amazon cheap and they can be found even some stores like Target. They can play just about anything you throw at it. I've been using it to watch a lot of shows that I record in MPEG-2 on my PC. No need for buying computer hardware and the licenses that come with it (on Windows at least) when you can plug in this DVD player for under seventy dollars and play it all. There are limitations, like no GMC or QPEL, but if you already have a fast PC then you can convert them with out those features with freely available software for just about any platform.
Recording with a cheap card like the TV Wonder to MPEG-2 and putting it on DVD-RW is easy enough but I just built a PC to plug into the receiver and TV with a few eBay parts (video card and a 500MCE) and an abandoned 900 MHZ Celeron. It plays back shows while recording just fine. No HDTV, but then again I can't afford the monthly bill of cable so I have to put that off for a while anyways. For an investment of about 200 bucks and a three or four year old PC will due. Just go the hardware encoding and decoding route.
What's important, the initial question, is: What will happen to the code? Can it be put into closed source software?
Some of it could - provided that they (CheckPoint) purchased the rights to that specific code when they bought the farm. Ahem, so to speak. Sourcefire, Martin Roesch, whoever could have sold their code under their copyright's - but they can't remove it from the GPL project and can't prevent others from using it. Really, if someone helped edit a portion of the code during debugging then the developer could only sell a copy of their original submission (because they still retain their copyright; the derivative works aren't theirs because the nature of the license).
If you wrote code for Snort then you don't have anything to worry about (in theory only) unless you signed something. We'll see what happens I guess.
I read the wire article in the local newspaper and can tell you that the "Court" is a secret court that hands out the permission to do the taps. This is set up under the PATRIOT Act that gives permission for wiretaps based on suspicion that the suspect is a "terrorist".
Most people don't have to worry until they "accidentally" ask for a tap on your phone, e-mail address, and wireless phone. Even a payphone you might just use! The problem here is FBI "error", which makes me think that the court isn't asking enough questions.
This is exactly what I want. I would like to see people working any GPL project to look at being able to port them to Windows, BSD, Macintosh, what have you. The GNU Tools compile under CYGWIN, of course, and that seems to look like the best start. If GeNToo can replicate that concept and then move the rest of the software along then you are looking at replicating only the framework to other platforms. CYGWIN and GeNToo can both help Linux users (and everyone) by maturing the framework for installing packages. I like the idea of different sources of packages - let's keep that. But RPM, Gentoo's Portage system and any other package system can take a fresh approach by trying to make installation seamless to a Windows user (and even those savvy Mac users). If they can do that there is no excuse for not having a clean, easy, desktop friendly Linux package system.
I see Gentoo's basic approach the best looking solution, but CYGWIN hasn't failed me yet. Of course, I still can't get XScreensaver to compile on XP Home (I know why, but there isn't anything I can do about it I assume). The idea that I can bring in any source code, compile it, and run it seems attractive. Although that would be dangerous on a machine where everyone has to be the administrator.
You can replace the Windows shell, by default it is "explorer.exe" of course. Being able to replace it with an actual X server (or script that launches the server and client...) and look, feel and play like I'm in KDE or Gnome would be great. Hmm... adding another user and making that their shell won't hurt... sounds like something to try.
Slashdot Mirror
lets ignore the wooden acting, bland direction and painful script for now. All the actors are in focus. They all have competently applied make up. The picture isn't grainy. You can't see any plywood poking out from behind the fairely extensive sets. The costumes look realistic. The audio is fine: you can hear the actors' lines without the music, sound effects, or ambiant noise drowning them out. There's a score. The custom 3-d modelling is competent. You can't see bits of camera equipment or sound booms in the frame, and so on. ...
You are comparing Mission to Mars to the original theatrical release of Star Wars aren't you?
Now help me get it out!!!
What this guy has done is create a service whereby he can onsell his asset at a low price point. Not really that stupid after all.
The same rules apply in the virtual world. You've got an area you call your own, the resources on said area are also your own. You could try to get a return on your investment by holding these resources until the time is right to sell, sell off portions of the resource or do nothing and be happy spending money.
Would you live on a farm that produced no product? If there were natural resources such as gems, petroleum or even attractions like waterfalls wouldn't you be at least thinking about ways to make money on them? Sure, there are some that would let people see the attraction for free, ignore the value of minerals that must be harvested in crude ways or refuse to let people shoot their animals and hook their fish for any reason, especially for money.
It's exactly like buying an island and turning a third into a resort, a third into destination spots (businesses, pristine land, room for activities) and leaving the remainder to your own enjoyment.
I mean, this guy does hunt on his own virtual island right?
So who do I call if my computer BSODs and I'm using all certified drivers?
Really, how many times does your XP, 2000 or 2003 computer blue screen. I'm no fanboy but I know how to handle my computer. The thing that you, and everyone else, fails to see is that you not only must use 100% certified drivers but you must also use software that uses the MSI installation process. I assume that their definition of supported software only comes from the top (and oldest) developers (Symantec, Microsoft themselves, others). This however is why you see some hardware developers distributing drivers with MSI packages that install additional software - for better compliance.
Trust me, the third thing you installed likely violated this agreement. Some Microsoft software even violates this protocol. Using codecs that aren't kosher will even violate this rule.
Even still, how are you blue screening 2000 or XP? They are not the greatest thing since sliced bread but you have to be an idiot to be breaking them today. I sure do crash a lot of programs and lock up the computer(s) from time to time but have had a retail XP home machine blue screen free since I bought it more than a year and a half ago. I don't get how people are being forced to re-install every six months or year. I've been using this "budget" PC for all this time how it shipped from the factory (with their crap) and about hundreds of applications installed since, with many being removed over time and plenty of updates; in some cases multiple versions of the same program have been installed when needed. CYGWIN, and plenty of other GPL or otherwise "free" software and lots of cheap hardware (ATI TV Wonder!) to boot. I've run VMWare with BSD and Linux inside, swapped out and replaced a few things and still no problems. (Knock on wood of course, but it isn't all luck).
Sometimes the solution is to go back to typewriters, calculators, newspapers, radio and mail service.
Doesn't say anything about certified drivers, or any drivers. They are covering their asses in case of Windows Update fucks a home user but if you've got a support agreement with Microsoft (likely for Windows 2003 at this point only) you are covered.
Don't forget that this includes approved software that uses MSI to install software and not any other process. I wish someone who has worked at Microsoft or someone who has actually used Windows 200x server products in a critical environment could back me up... but this *is* Slashdot.
I for one welcome our new tamper-resistant overlords.
I've always said surfing the web with IE is like going around sticking your dick in people without a rubber... eventually you are going to get something.
(off-topic, forgive me...)
Nothing is safe anymore. Sex became scary and now looking at porn is going to give me a virus or some other sort of infection that isn't easy to clear up.
Sheese
There is one thing you all keep leaving out about certified drivers:
Without them you aren't guaranteed support from Microsoft.
If you are running machines with all certified drivers and WMI/MSI installed applications then Microsoft will be right there with you until the problem is solved. You won't find it written anywhere but Microsoft gurantees that you're machine will not crash (BSOD) if you use certified drivers and MSI installed software. At home this isn't possible, but in some environments it is possible (and a good idea in other places).
In a way you are locked in to what Microsoft has approved, but if they've approved it then the problem is theirs to fix - not yours. Good luck meeting those two requirements, but if you can: hold them to it.
Their true cost of a web-enabled phone is often well over $100, but the true cost is hidden somewhere in the 1 to 2 year contract with the provider.
And there lies the problem of trying to improve the less fortunate from a 'techie' standpoint. The idea of a "cheap" phone or other device they can "own" is pretty straightforward. The problem is as you stated, you don't own anything and are doing nothing more than begging for their service.
When they give you that fancy $300-500 phone for less than one hundred dollars they have to lock you into the contract to pay for the equipment. None of these companies are worried that you'll leave for another service a year down the line because of any natural competition. They are afraid of you leaving with what is essentially their phone. They haven't finished paying for it yet.
As an aside I see a major problem with mobile phone services in America. They are still tied to the phones. Consumers have come to expect that their carrier will supply them with a phone or that the carrier will sell them one (cheap). This was the strategy of Cellular phone companies like Ameritech. Then there was a large revolution in digital phone services with Qualcomm offering phones that really were $100 and way better. Upstarts like GTE were offering better, digital (PCS) services for nothing and no strings.
Overnight the old cellular companies were bought out, swallowed up, renamed or reformed. Everything was digital and things got way better. Now you could get the web, e-mail and text messages. Soon you could be sending photos! Suddenly major phone manufacturers started making phones with way too much jazz and now they are finally using that power. It's great, but there is a side effect. We are back to the old system. Sprint, Cingular, whomever is giving away phones for complex, costly contracts to pay for those phones. The digital phone revolution failed.
Something tangible (which may not be this $100 laptop) that we can give, instead of a service we can offer, makes a lot more sense. It only makes sense to develop a product that can be donated and left alone to flourish and then maybe bought later down the road. Hopefully a $100 laptop can get other governments to promise a PC for each child. Once they have that we can offer things like mobile phone services - but people have to start somewhere.
Don't get me wrong, most of the content I watch is Xvid files (that I'm not paying a dime for) or "homemade" DVD+R movies.
I just think it would be great to use the products in place to sell videos online. Every certified divx player has the ability to use their (evil?) DRM technology - now where is the content?
The reason this works is because it was the same thing that was happening online. Not more than an hour or so after a show aired you were starting to see torrents for VCD formatted shows and later an HDTV MPEG4. The main distributors were shut down but some of us downloaded them all.
I watched enough shows and had no interest in Lost. After the season was over I had time to catch up and watched them all (24?) in about three or four days. Now I'm hooked. I got the DVD and now am watching the shows live on HD. Now the problem is I'm missing another show. I've got dual tuner recorder but more services would be great.
I want to see all the networks do this. I've got a certified Divx player (Philips DVP642) that has a DRM passphrase and no content to buy for it, except porn and instructional videos (about sailboating). When can I see sales of full size (ie: progressive, high resolution) shows? I'd even deal with a few ads, like one in the start and one at the end.
Apple forced other unlikely candidates into selling music online (Walmart), what about video?
Well we can only hope that it will leave Google leaner and meaner and then the feature requests will roll in. Then when a PIM is good enough to enter the suite maybe Google will tweak it again and then we'll have the Office killer.
I've never had the great experience of using Outlook and/or Exchange; but it must be tackled to replace Office in many environments.
May they continue to provide such a useful service for years to come.
Bad news, since this story is one the Slashdot front page, IMDb will soon be bought by Google.
Use it or don't use it.
Al Gore would be rolling in his grave if he heard this kind of talk!
We developed the Internet for speech and no country without our level of speech should control a major portion of its operations. The problem is that if we don't start rolling out Internet2 then we don't have leg to stand on when it comes to solutions.
"I did it, it's my ball"
I only say develop an alternative to HTTP because I would assume that they want a different protocol and port number because who wants accidentally hit an American site?
It's more like: we are watching the ball and you want to take it to play with it. Why should we let you go break it when we have watched it faithfully this long? Besides, you play by different, more restrictive rules in some cases. Those rules jeopardize the ball.
All of the technologies and so forth belong to the DoD, but America is the country that has made it all possible.
should read:
All of the technologies and so forth don't belong to the DoD, but America is the country that has made it all possible.
I am just trying to play devil's advocate in the first place with my response, but I like your idea. The idea that they were a divergent group in the evolutionary chain is likely.
Is there any chance that they could have been H.sapiens and at one time they were numerous and now just a recessive trait?
The thing is, other countries *have* built their own networks. Or did you think the US was running around the world installing fiber and cable for everyone??
Insightful?
I'm talking about what Bush would call: The Global TCP/IP Network, the Internet. Developed by DARPA as DARPANET, and so the story goes. The great thing about networking in general is that now the lines are laid they can just run both or either or even layer theirs into ours.
Yes, I said "ours".
Al Gore would be rolling in his grave!
The cable is theirs but the "Internet" belongs to everyone given to them by the United States Department of Defense more or less. All of the technologies and so forth belong to the DoD, but America is the country that has made it all possible. Many people wrote about the same idea but the American tax payer made it all possible. (See: Al Gore)
Where am I wrong?
"imagine if there were only 4-5 email servers in the world, and you could only email users of your email server"
AOL and Prodigy up until 1994?
If you sampled 100 people, what is the chance that you will get one diminutive person, let alone 20?
Depends on where you do the sampling. In Finland or an Amish country and it could be higher (Cartilage-hair hypoplasia) because these groups don't date outside of their groups enough (genetic shift) to make these "rare" exceptions rare anymore.
If you had a group that lived alone you could get a "tribe" of little people, but they would still be human.
These countries want to be able to control the Internet (at least within their borders) themselves. They want to engage in suppression of free speech, and create impediments to global commerce.
Well, then let them build their own network! No, being serious here - there is a way to solve all of this. Someone needs to develop their own DNS-like system and while they are at it develop a alternative to HTTP (because this is what we are really talking about here isn't it folks, "teh web"). When they get this new system up and running they can just go ahead and run it on our TCP/IP networks if they'd like (for a fee). By no means however is this going to take DNS control from us here in the states, ours would just exist along side "theirs".
It's possible, so these people should stop bitching.
Then again you would need to get American software companies like Microsoft to ship modified software to you specially because everything in it relies on DNS today (Active Directory can't work without it) and you would need to change a lot of other things, but it's possible.
You can love or hate the US and the current administration, but over the last two-plus centuries, pray tell what other major country has done more to promote free speech?
Well, I don't know about this part of the post. I hate the administration and I don't think they are doing a damn thing for free speech (remember the loyalty oath to see a Bush speech and USAPATRIOT) but I love America and what it stands for and I think only we should be in control for the reason you stated above - some regimes want to censor the Internet.
What scares me is that giving the UN control of the DNS servers will allow people from outside of America control an American's inherent right to free speech. If I put up a site that dishes on the Queen of England then she can petition the UN to revoke my domain name. If I wanted to put a site up called BRANDNAME-SUCKS.COM WIPO might close me down.
It isn't that I don't trust the UN - I just don't trust anyone I can't "see" in an American court.
I got one off of Amazon cheap and they can be found even some stores like Target. They can play just about anything you throw at it. I've been using it to watch a lot of shows that I record in MPEG-2 on my PC. No need for buying computer hardware and the licenses that come with it (on Windows at least) when you can plug in this DVD player for under seventy dollars and play it all. There are limitations, like no GMC or QPEL, but if you already have a fast PC then you can convert them with out those features with freely available software for just about any platform.
Recording with a cheap card like the TV Wonder to MPEG-2 and putting it on DVD-RW is easy enough but I just built a PC to plug into the receiver and TV with a few eBay parts (video card and a 500MCE) and an abandoned 900 MHZ Celeron. It plays back shows while recording just fine. No HDTV, but then again I can't afford the monthly bill of cable so I have to put that off for a while anyways. For an investment of about 200 bucks and a three or four year old PC will due. Just go the hardware encoding and decoding route.
"snort" or "snort" as a software product belongs to him, or the company regardless of the licensing scheme attached to the product with the same name.
Who owns copyrights, trademarks, all of that garbage doesn't matter much when you are talking about GPL software. In a sense you are putting everything on the line when you release GPL software but you by no means are giving away the entire farm. The copyright is yours, we've covered this! When people contribute code then their code is © them and not you.
What's important, the initial question, is: What will happen to the code? Can it be put into closed source software?
Some of it could - provided that they (CheckPoint) purchased the rights to that specific code when they bought the farm. Ahem, so to speak. Sourcefire, Martin Roesch, whoever could have sold their code under their copyright's - but they can't remove it from the GPL project and can't prevent others from using it. Really, if someone helped edit a portion of the code during debugging then the developer could only sell a copy of their original submission (because they still retain their copyright; the derivative works aren't theirs because the nature of the license).
If you wrote code for Snort then you don't have anything to worry about (in theory only) unless you signed something. We'll see what happens I guess.
I read the wire article in the local newspaper and can tell you that the "Court" is a secret court that hands out the permission to do the taps. This is set up under the PATRIOT Act that gives permission for wiretaps based on suspicion that the suspect is a "terrorist".
Most people don't have to worry until they "accidentally" ask for a tap on your phone, e-mail address, and wireless phone. Even a payphone you might just use! The problem here is FBI "error", which makes me think that the court isn't asking enough questions.
I want choise of Kernel, then choise of userland.
This is exactly what I want. I would like to see people working any GPL project to look at being able to port them to Windows, BSD, Macintosh, what have you. The GNU Tools compile under CYGWIN, of course, and that seems to look like the best start. If GeNToo can replicate that concept and then move the rest of the software along then you are looking at replicating only the framework to other platforms. CYGWIN and GeNToo can both help Linux users (and everyone) by maturing the framework for installing packages. I like the idea of different sources of packages - let's keep that. But RPM, Gentoo's Portage system and any other package system can take a fresh approach by trying to make installation seamless to a Windows user (and even those savvy Mac users). If they can do that there is no excuse for not having a clean, easy, desktop friendly Linux package system.
I see Gentoo's basic approach the best looking solution, but CYGWIN hasn't failed me yet. Of course, I still can't get XScreensaver to compile on XP Home (I know why, but there isn't anything I can do about it I assume). The idea that I can bring in any source code, compile it, and run it seems attractive. Although that would be dangerous on a machine where everyone has to be the administrator.
You can replace the Windows shell, by default it is "explorer.exe" of course. Being able to replace it with an actual X server (or script that launches the server and client...) and look, feel and play like I'm in KDE or Gnome would be great. Hmm... adding another user and making that their shell won't hurt... sounds like something to try.
I beg for the day...