Oh come on. So you really think there is no law about copying library books? Have you ever NOTICED those warning signs by the copiers? And you think the law says that if your friend loans you his CD and you copy it without telling him, there was no copywrite infringment involved?
Yes, this is for HDTV owners. "Regular" TVs can't broadcast the resolutions we are talking about here. Hell, current high-end DVD technology is unusable for regular TVs right now. I wonder how many people buying "progressive scan" DVD players realize "normal" TV's can't use them.
Now we have to throw away all the current players and TV's to take advantage of this. People are just now getting used to DVD's and they want to switch formats so soon? Bad move.
You're an idiot. This is for those people that have ALREADY thrown out their TV's for HDTV. Current DVDs can't support more than 520p, while this format would do 720p/1080i.
The ACLU did NOT state that "broadband access is a threat to internet freedom". This is a study on the problem of broadband monopolies being created in the cable market only, due to common carrier restrictions.
The court ordered Napster shut until it could guarantee none of the music it allowed to be shared was copyright protected. It did not rule that p2p was illegal. In fact, it stated that it had other, legal uses besides copying protected work, which was why it could stay in business as long as it fulfilled the court order (or ran out of money, which is what ultimately happened). What is your point?
Besides, you seem to be confusing "immoral" with "illegal". You might want to read the rest of this subthread, where these issues have already been addressed.
Auto weapons are illegal because the Congress said they were. Not all guns (the medium) are illegal. Again, what is your point here?
Wrong analogy. Police need just cause and evidence. Hanging out with criminals might be enough to get you stopped and investigated, such as hanging out near a drug house, but unless they actually find some drugs on you, they can't arrest you. Or rather they can, but you probably have a case for false arrest.
And on-line casinos aren't illegal everywhere -- they are legal in some places. In any event, concern for liability would be another good reason to ban p2p. However, that doesn't have much to do with morality, to stay on topic.
Believe it or not, I agree with you that most p2p use is for theft. You don't have to "feel" sharing warez across p2p is theft, it IS by definition.
Your ISP has a number of valid reasons (IMO) to ban p2p -- bandwidth is a completely fair one. Illegality (if proven) is another. However, morality has got to be just about the worst reason. I don't want someone qualitatively deciding what is "moral" or not for me. And I don't want my ISP presuming that what I am doing is illegal. The burden of proof for illegal activities should be on the ISP, NOT the customer.
A EULA on bandwidth - well, I don't like it (actually I hate it), but I realize the necessity. I have yet to see a EULA with a morality clause, and hope I never will.
To further clarify, I have not expressed my own views regarding p2p file-sharing because it isn't relevant within the context of this thread.
I realize you are not the ISP you work for. However, while you are distancing yourself from their decision, you also said that "we are not weeping at their loss". You can't have it both ways.
I work for an ISP in the Pacific Northwest, and we block access to all p2p file-sharing programs. These programs {KaZaA, etc.) are blocked because the owners feel that they promote activities which are immoral and wrong.
You are basically saying the medium is immoral somehow, without regard to the message. Given this logic, you can just as easily say FTP, HTTP, email, usenet, and every other port can "promote activities which are immoral and wrong". Hell, I would guess that kiddie porn is transmitted through each of the above protocols everyday, so why aren't you blocking them?
Why stop there? Most of the files transmitted through p2p can just as easily be sent through the mail on a disk. Why not ban mail?
It's pretty sad when your users have to "demonstrate" their piety to use a particular protocol. What ISP did you say you worked for again?
There is a clause in the TOS restricting bandwidth, at least in the San Antonio RR TOS.
Subscriber acknowledges and agrees that Time Warner Cable shall have the right to monitor bandwidth utilization (i.e., volume of data transmitted) arising out of the Service provided hereunder at any time and on an on-going basis and to limit excessive use of bandwidth in order to effectuate these provisions and other terms hereof
Scary stuff. They, and only they, decide what "excessive use" really is.
The German beer purity law only allowed for water, hops, barley, and yeast. Stout uses a more roasted barley, giving it a darker color.
Btw, the purity laws are no longer in effect, at least legally, because the violate EC trade laws. Many brewers still follow them though, legal or not.
Basically, you have an app with a secure connection, and everytime you want to use your card you can generate a one-time number. You can set a limit on it too. Even if the merchant's security sucks, no one can use that number again.
Having had to replace my cards after that Egghead fiasco a while back, this gives me at least a little more peace of mind.
*** For a category that has NEW silicon running it!***
Um, yes, it is new silicon. That doesn't make the benchmarks any better. It's new silicon with terrible benchmarks. What is your point? Saying it will get better later doesn't make it good now.
And while you only care about MPEGs, some people care about performance and battery life. Some people run apps that use a bit more processing power than "contact lists", even if you don't.
MS admits in the linked article that the OS is not "optimized". It fails to use the new ARM instruction set, and worse, does not seem to use the power-management capabilities of the XScale. Supposedly the Xscale uses half the power of the StrongARM, but battery tests on the new PPCs do not show this savings. This fix will be a while coming, as the next version of the OS does not appear to be optimized either.
Interestingly, Asus in their upcoming Xscale PPC is coming up with workarounds, such as on the fly automatic clock and voltage throttling. So while the Xscale supports capabilites that MS is not using, the vendors are not waiting for next year for MS to get their act together.
Hopefully the vendors will also figure out a way to speed up the terrible benchmarks of the Xscale PPCs.
While 3d would be a blast for games, or cartoons, has anyone ever SEEN 3d holograms of people? You have a suspension of disbelief when seeing a flat 2d screen -- you don't think of them as 5" tall people. People rendered in 3d break this little fantasy the brain has worked up for itself, and you wind up seeing little moveable dolls.
Maybe this effect goes away after a while, and someone with experience watching people as 3d holograms for days at a time (if anyone like that exists) can comment.
Slashdot Mirror
This is excellent news for people who prefer to Quake on the best OS available
;-)
Wouldn't this normally rate a Flamebait on a regular commment?
Oh come on. So you really think there is no law about copying library books? Have you ever NOTICED those warning signs by the copiers? And you think the law says that if your friend loans you his CD and you copy it without telling him, there was no copywrite infringment involved?
Since when is viewing copyright material illegal?
I don't believe it is. However, downloading of copyright material without the consent of the rights holder IS illegal.
And they don't need to d/l the file from them. It would be more effective as a scare tactic to warrant -> take the computer, and pretty easy too.
Don't shoot the messenger.
Actually this sounds like a storyline of a particularly GOOD Space 1999 episode.
Yes, this is for HDTV owners. "Regular" TVs can't broadcast the resolutions we are talking about here. Hell, current high-end DVD technology is unusable for regular TVs right now. I wonder how many people buying "progressive scan" DVD players realize "normal" TV's can't use them.
It's already here in San Francisco. I have an HDTV tower broadcasting 5 stations about a half mile from my building.
Now we have to throw away all the current players and TV's to take advantage of this. People are just now getting used to DVD's and they want to switch formats so soon? Bad move.
You're an idiot. This is for those people that have ALREADY thrown out their TV's for HDTV. Current DVDs can't support more than 520p, while this format would do 720p/1080i.
The ACLU did NOT state that "broadband access is a threat to internet freedom". This is a study on the problem of broadband monopolies being created in the cable market only, due to common carrier restrictions.
Question: Why did Napster lose in court?
The court ordered Napster shut until it could guarantee none of the music it allowed to be shared was copyright protected. It did not rule that p2p was illegal. In fact, it stated that it had other, legal uses besides copying protected work, which was why it could stay in business as long as it fulfilled the court order (or ran out of money, which is what ultimately happened). What is your point?
Besides, you seem to be confusing "immoral" with "illegal". You might want to read the rest of this subthread, where these issues have already been addressed.
Auto weapons are illegal because the Congress said they were. Not all guns (the medium) are illegal. Again, what is your point here?
Wrong analogy. Police need just cause and evidence. Hanging out with criminals might be enough to get you stopped and investigated, such as hanging out near a drug house, but unless they actually find some drugs on you, they can't arrest you. Or rather they can, but you probably have a case for false arrest.
And on-line casinos aren't illegal everywhere -- they are legal in some places. In any event, concern for liability would be another good reason to ban p2p. However, that doesn't have much to do with morality, to stay on topic.
Believe it or not, I agree with you that most p2p use is for theft. You don't have to "feel" sharing warez across p2p is theft, it IS by definition.
Your ISP has a number of valid reasons (IMO) to ban p2p -- bandwidth is a completely fair one. Illegality (if proven) is another. However, morality has got to be just about the worst reason. I don't want someone qualitatively deciding what is "moral" or not for me. And I don't want my ISP presuming that what I am doing is illegal. The burden of proof for illegal activities should be on the ISP, NOT the customer.
A EULA on bandwidth - well, I don't like it (actually I hate it), but I realize the necessity. I have yet to see a EULA with a morality clause, and hope I never will.
To further clarify, I have not expressed my own views regarding p2p file-sharing because it isn't relevant within the context of this thread.
I realize you are not the ISP you work for. However, while you are distancing yourself from their decision, you also said that "we are not weeping at their loss". You can't have it both ways.
I work for an ISP in the Pacific Northwest, and we block access to all p2p file-sharing programs. These programs {KaZaA, etc.) are blocked because the owners feel that they promote activities which are immoral and wrong.
You are basically saying the medium is immoral somehow, without regard to the message. Given this logic, you can just as easily say FTP, HTTP, email, usenet, and every other port can "promote activities which are immoral and wrong". Hell, I would guess that kiddie porn is transmitted through each of the above protocols everyday, so why aren't you blocking them?
Why stop there? Most of the files transmitted through p2p can just as easily be sent through the mail on a disk. Why not ban mail?
It's pretty sad when your users have to "demonstrate" their piety to use a particular protocol. What ISP did you say you worked for again?
There is a big difference deciding qualitatively vs. quantitatively.
There is a clause in the TOS restricting bandwidth, at least in the San Antonio RR TOS.
Subscriber acknowledges and agrees that Time Warner Cable shall have the right to monitor bandwidth utilization (i.e., volume of data transmitted) arising out of the Service provided hereunder at any time and on an on-going basis and to limit excessive use of bandwidth in order to effectuate these provisions and other terms hereof
Scary stuff. They, and only they, decide what "excessive use" really is.
The German beer purity law only allowed for water, hops, barley, and yeast. Stout uses a more roasted barley, giving it a darker color.
Btw, the purity laws are no longer in effect, at least legally, because the violate EC trade laws. Many brewers still follow them though, legal or not.
Stout is just a subset of beer. Stout just means "strong".
Times have changed in the States. If you are in San Francisco, ask one of the zillion slashdotters here to bring you to a real bar/pub sometime.
ROFL. Well, out of PhysicsGenius's last 24 comments, 5 were rated -1 troll, so I think you may be correct.
On the otherhand, if it is a fake case, I think it shows so much chutzpa that I think people should mod him up to 5. Use Funny lol.
Citibank offers virtual account numbers. Don't know if it works under WINE.
Basically, you have an app with a secure connection, and everytime you want to use your card you can generate a one-time number. You can set a limit on it too. Even if the merchant's security sucks, no one can use that number again.
Having had to replace my cards after that Egghead fiasco a while back, this gives me at least a little more peace of mind.
link
*** For a category that has NEW silicon running it!***
Um, yes, it is new silicon. That doesn't make the benchmarks any better. It's new silicon with terrible benchmarks. What is your point? Saying it will get better later doesn't make it good now.
And while you only care about MPEGs, some people care about performance and battery life. Some people run apps that use a bit more processing power than "contact lists", even if you don't.
Bonus *off* for replys.
Considering that its running at 400MHz compared to the 206 of the Ipaq, then yes, those benchmarks are terrible.
Bonus *off* for replies.
MS admits in the linked article that the OS is not "optimized". It fails to use the new ARM instruction set, and worse, does not seem to use the power-management capabilities of the XScale. Supposedly the Xscale uses half the power of the StrongARM, but battery tests on the new PPCs do not show this savings. This fix will be a while coming, as the next version of the OS does not appear to be optimized either.
Interestingly, Asus in their upcoming Xscale PPC is coming up with workarounds, such as on the fly automatic clock and voltage throttling. So while the Xscale supports capabilites that MS is not using, the vendors are not waiting for next year for MS to get their act together.
Hopefully the vendors will also figure out a way to speed up the terrible benchmarks of the Xscale PPCs.
While 3d would be a blast for games, or cartoons, has anyone ever SEEN 3d holograms of people? You have a suspension of disbelief when seeing a flat 2d screen -- you don't think of them as 5" tall people. People rendered in 3d break this little fantasy the brain has worked up for itself, and you wind up seeing little moveable dolls.
Maybe this effect goes away after a while, and someone with experience watching people as 3d holograms for days at a time (if anyone like that exists) can comment.