Call me paranoid, but I'm not willing to have my bills paid "automatically".
I happen to work for the largest of the electronic bill payment systems. I can assure you that nothing is payed "automatically". You log onto a web site and have the opportunity to approve / decline each bill payment, each month. Nothing happens without your approval.
And what internet are you living on? I get at least 5 spams per day. My wife, who does a lot more on-line shopping than I do, gets twice that. Spam is alive and well.
I wouldn't touch a GPL'd codec because i don't want to have to give away my source code. You can't sell software if you give away the source. And no, i don't want to sell 'services' - i'm a programmer, not a babysitter.
hold on here.... are americans bad because they want to exert control over others or are they bad because they refuse to allow standards to be dictated to them ? they can't be both.
All they are saying here is that if they go out and install some of their equipment on your property they should have a right to access it even if you are no longer owner of this property.
Given that you can't speak for future owners of the property. How can you legally sign such a contract?
it really takes a year or two until compilers get updated to support the architectural tweaks.
Intel has just released a compiler. It is for both Itanium and 32-bit procs.
I did some tests with it and here are my first impressions:
It's Slow. I would estimate 5x as slow as the MS compiler. Much slower on C++ code (compared to C).
It generates lots of error and warning messages that MS's compiler doesn't. At the same time, it doesn't generate messages that MS does.
On my crude benchmark test - rotation of a 24-bit (170x270) bitmap, bi-linear interpolated, the Intel compiler generates code that runs 33% faster! (on my p700).
The final code size is roughly twice that of the MS compiler, with the same optimization settings.
It blends seamlessly (really) into the Visual Studio environment. You just pick which compiler you want to use from a menu - sweet.
Compuserve does not own a patent on GIF , nobody does. Unisys owns a patent on the LZW compression algorithm, that GIF uses. Compuserve just ignorantly used patented technology in its GIF file format - and now we suffer.
Black's Law describes theft as the unauthorized (not unlawful) deprivation of property, or in some cases, benefit of that property.
By that legal definition, unauthorized copying is not and cannot be theft
Wrong.
The "property" in IP is the control over distribution of the IP.
-c
Re:I know I'll be modded down, but bear with me he
on
Warez and Abandonware
·
· Score: 1
Consider the following situation: if I developed a magical duplication machine, and went into my local grocery store, then duplicated a loaf of bread out of nothingness, and gave it to a starving child outside, would the shopkeeper be angered that I had duplicated his bread?
yes. yes. yes.
it's not about the stupid bread. it's about the control over distribution of the stupid bread. once you start copying the stupid bread, you've taken away the shopkeeper's ability to profit from the control over distribution. this is exactly what IP laws do - they give you control over distribution (by making it illegal for anyone else to make copies of the stupid bread).
There are many people living in poor economic conditions, who could not afford to use a computer if it wasn't for unauthorised software duplication. [...] These people would surely not be purchasing the software otherwise, so who is harmed by these actions?
so, people are entitled to have everything they want, even if they can't afford to pay the sticker price? why in the fucking world should i spend three years writing an app just so some lazy jerkoff can say "but, DOOd, i'm poor and underprivileged, but i really have to have the latest version of your program. don't put me down, free everything for everyone, yeah."
I don't see duplication of software as 'piracy' or theft, I see it as sharing.
then you are ignorant or blind.
-c
Control over distribution isn't copied with "cp"
on
Warez and Abandonware
·
· Score: 1
Yes, it's different. If you steal my IP, I still have my IP. We both have it now.
with IP it isn't about the bits or the words that make up the work - it's about the control over distribution of those bits (or words). if you take my IP and distribute it under whatever "free stuff" flag you're sponsoring, then you have taken away my control of the distribution, and thereby reduced my ability to generate revenue from those bits. that is what IP laws protect - the ability to profit (or not, in the case of abandonware) from your bits by controlling who gets copies.
or, put differently: the asset isn't the bits, the asset is the control of the bits. if you take away that control, then i indeed have lost something.
even more, this signature can be used as a complicated checksum to tell when an app has been modified (either by virus or by a crack).
the downside is that this effectively shuts out free software to many many people. as soon as bored worker X figures out that he can't use the hot new screen savers from www.screesavers.com because they were developed for fun, distributed for free and therefore are unsigned, he'll either give up on non-signed software or turn off the signtaure checking stuff altogether.
either way, MS has just made some people's days a little less fun.
to create a computer with enough intelligence to recognize intent would be a large step beyond teaching a computer to think like a person, which itself would be a far step beyond teaching a computer to think, which itself is a goal that we're nowhere near reaching (Eudora's rude email filter notwithstanding).
According to an NPR story i heard the other day, the electoral college has had over 700 challenges in congress since its inception, making it the most challenged part of the constitution. Those challenges have failed, of course.
I have returned from the mountain and this is what I have seen:
<prediction>
Because of the havoc caused in the past by simply clueless script kiddies and their truly malicious cohorts, the Internet of the future will have strict controls on the traffic it allows. Only a severly limited set of simple protocols will be allows (http and ftp, for example).
Computers will be regulated and monitored; there won't be any opportunity to write your own software to bypass the restrictions because all traffic will be encrypted, signed and filtered by the hardware - and only devices from government approved and certified vendors will be allowed to connect.
</prediction>
Think it can't happen? It's already happening with hardware - encrypted speaker connections, for example.
...this is actually happening in North Carolina (and probably elsewhere, too). people are calling women voters (at least in the news story i saw) to tell them that either women are voting on the 8th and men on the 7th, or democrats on the 8th and republicans on the 7th.
Slashdot Mirror
I happen to work for the largest of the electronic bill payment systems. I can assure you that nothing is payed "automatically". You log onto a web site and have the opportunity to approve / decline each bill payment, each month. Nothing happens without your approval.
-c
And what internet are you living on? I get at least 5 spams per day. My wife, who does a lot more on-line shopping than I do, gets twice that. Spam is alive and well.
-c
In my opinion, *GPL is a deterrent to adoption.
I wouldn't touch a GPL'd codec because i don't want to have to give away my source code. You can't sell software if you give away the source. And no, i don't want to sell 'services' - i'm a programmer, not a babysitter.
-c
Pssst... it's not 1992 anymore. The web isn't just about text documents. Some of us are here to shop, sell or even... to be entertained.
-c
hold on here.... are americans bad because they want to exert control over others or are they bad because they refuse to allow standards to be dictated to them ? they can't be both.
-c
good stuff, dood.
Given that you can't speak for future owners of the property. How can you legally sign such a contract?
-c
Intel has just released a compiler. It is for both Itanium and 32-bit procs.
I did some tests with it and here are my first impressions:
- It's Slow. I would estimate 5x as slow as the MS compiler. Much slower on C++ code (compared to C).
- It generates lots of error and warning messages that MS's compiler doesn't. At the same time, it doesn't generate messages that MS does.
- On my crude benchmark test - rotation of a 24-bit (170x270) bitmap, bi-linear interpolated, the Intel compiler generates code that runs 33% faster! (on my p700).
- The final code size is roughly twice that of the MS compiler, with the same optimization settings.
- It blends seamlessly (really) into the Visual Studio environment. You just pick which compiler you want to use from a menu - sweet.
-cCompuserve does not own a patent on GIF , nobody does. Unisys owns a patent on the LZW compression algorithm, that GIF uses. Compuserve just ignorantly used patented technology in its GIF file format - and now we suffer.
now prove that the mechanical reader is correct.
G.E.B.
-c
Wrong.
The "property" in IP is the control over distribution of the IP.
-c
yes. yes. yes.
it's not about the stupid bread. it's about the control over distribution of the stupid bread. once you start copying the stupid bread, you've taken away the shopkeeper's ability to profit from the control over distribution. this is exactly what IP laws do - they give you control over distribution (by making it illegal for anyone else to make copies of the stupid bread).
There are many people living in poor economic conditions, who could not afford to use a computer if it wasn't for unauthorised software duplication. [...] These people would surely not be purchasing the software otherwise, so who is harmed by these actions?
so, people are entitled to have everything they want, even if they can't afford to pay the sticker price? why in the fucking world should i spend three years writing an app just so some lazy jerkoff can say "but, DOOd, i'm poor and underprivileged, but i really have to have the latest version of your program. don't put me down, free everything for everyone, yeah."
I don't see duplication of software as 'piracy' or theft, I see it as sharing.
then you are ignorant or blind.
-c
with IP it isn't about the bits or the words that make up the work - it's about the control over distribution of those bits (or words). if you take my IP and distribute it under whatever "free stuff" flag you're sponsoring, then you have taken away my control of the distribution, and thereby reduced my ability to generate revenue from those bits. that is what IP laws protect - the ability to profit (or not, in the case of abandonware) from your bits by controlling who gets copies.
or, put differently: the asset isn't the bits, the asset is the control of the bits. if you take away that control, then i indeed have lost something.
-c
that's a decidedly un-American thing to do. those people should be sent to Captitalist Re-education Classes.
-c
-c
Who owns the copyright to "unreadable" ? I tried a web search but couldn't find any info on this.
-c
no. but you may be one of many people who didn't read the article but felt they had to respond anyway.
Not wanting the Enemy to bomb you is the mother of lots of fun stuff... :)
-c
even more, this signature can be used as a complicated checksum to tell when an app has been modified (either by virus or by a crack).
the downside is that this effectively shuts out free software to many many people. as soon as bored worker X figures out that he can't use the hot new screen savers from www.screesavers.com because they were developed for fun, distributed for free and therefore are unsigned, he'll either give up on non-signed software or turn off the signtaure checking stuff altogether.
either way, MS has just made some people's days a little less fun.
-c
possible yes. but not in our lifetimes, i'd bet.
to create a computer with enough intelligence to recognize intent would be a large step beyond teaching a computer to think like a person, which itself would be a far step beyond teaching a computer to think, which itself is a goal that we're nowhere near reaching (Eudora's rude email filter notwithstanding).
go read G.E.B.
-c
According to an NPR story i heard the other day, the electoral college has had over 700 challenges in congress since its inception, making it the most challenged part of the constitution. Those challenges have failed, of course.
-c
the choices looked like this:
Gore
My job was to "complete" the arrow next to my choice. it wasn't a circle to fill in, or a box to check, it was an arrow to "complete".
get me out of this state.
-c (in NC)
<prediction>
Because of the havoc caused in the past by simply clueless script kiddies and their truly malicious cohorts, the Internet of the future will have strict controls on the traffic it allows. Only a severly limited set of simple protocols will be allows (http and ftp, for example).
Computers will be regulated and monitored; there won't be any opportunity to write your own software to bypass the restrictions because all traffic will be encrypted, signed and filtered by the hardware - and only devices from government approved and certified vendors will be allowed to connect.
</prediction>
Think it can't happen? It's already happening with hardware - encrypted speaker connections, for example.
-c
...this is actually happening in North Carolina (and probably elsewhere, too). people are calling women voters (at least in the news story i saw) to tell them that either women are voting on the 8th and men on the 7th, or democrats on the 8th and republicans on the 7th.
hooray!
-c