Technically there has been very little DRM (if any?) that is impervious. Methinks that bogus salespeople and lawyers are duping a lot of companies to BELIEVE that what they are selling actually works. They KNOW that the content holders are looking for a magic bullet to solve their "perceived" piracy problems (and I say "perceived" because I'm sure that's what the CEO's would like to be the problem because then they don't have to consider lowering prices). It's the same with companies making money saying they can do ANYTHING about P2P traffic. They can't do anything that seriously makes an impact and they know it, but knowing that record labels and movie film giants are loath to reduce prices they bait them into buying their product for $$$. It's a matter of the greedy bastards scamming greedy bastards.
Flash is popular in so much as it can do things you can't do with a regular browser without add-ons. Adobe is getting nervous because the Web is catching up to their plugin. Period.
No, it's their network and their stupid rules. You can of course use your own laptop but if you want to use their network you have to abide by their rules.
I'd recommend getting a cell access point like verizon/sprint/something mifi. If they don't like you creating your own AP then tether it to a cell phone.
Yes, it's in the interest of society. They don't need them, just take them and give it to others....
What? That's not fair? Well of COURSE it's fair and as long as I am the person to implement it everything will be OK. Anybody who disagrees with this is OBVIOUSLY a nut case as rebalancing the fairness of internet addressing is in the public good and of course I'm only interested in the public good.
The road to Hell is paved with good intentions. God save me from people who would do good my name.
Although Apple's (The Steve's) plans are patently capitalistic and really have nothing to do with pushing standards unless they benefit Apple directly, I'd not shed a TEAR if flash went away. It's really hard to boo hoo for Adobe.
What would be bad is if sites exclusively use HTML5 video for Ipad/iphone users ONLY and exclude PC/Mac/Linux users from accessing the HTML5 versions of the page. So far I've been unable to get the HTML 5 versions to work on my Mac. I hate flash, I hate the whole (execute a binary blob inside my browser). Java is still in that area but I'm less animated about that due to the fact that java is GPL'd.
Your Honor it was not my fault. The Earth's magnetic field in a fit of anomalous abnormally high activity a half-hour prior to the robbery compromised my frontal lobe's capacity to allow me to understand what I was going to do was wrong......
Wow...all those years of double daring my data center colleagues to put the hand electric de-gausser to their forehead and turn it on for 30 seconds might have more of an effect than I anticipated.....
Why they don't use freenet for this is beyond me. Yes, freenet is not lighting fast but it's getting better and it would be MUCH more difficult for anybody to get them if they used it.
Actually, I've modified my thoughts on this slightly. You are correct though. Thing is, there are enough states willing to take this thing to court that one has to wonder what would happen if it's upheld by the court.
The court case could be a game of Chicken between the federal and state governments. By striking it down the court would KNOW that there might very well be enough states to either 1)propose and pass a constitutional amendment or...even more scary for the Federal Government...2) Convene a constitutional convention. The last time the states got close to doing that the federal government blinked big time. You could make the argument that they might uphold it actually encouraging the states to go the constitutional route (an opinion by Scalia, Roberts and Thomas could pour gasoline on the idea).
Generally the states are feckless but when you back somebody into a corner with no place to go, no place to run and no one to blame they might HAVE to. Given the public's mood state legislatures might swing HARD to republican/libertarian candidates. It all depends on when the case gets to the Supremes's (if ever). If it gets to the Supremes and there has been time for state legislatures to feel the effect of people feeling their only recourse against the Federal Government is there state governments then WATCH OUT!
I'd imagine that if a Constitutional Convention was proposed by state legislatures that have a republican/libertarian leaning it would not just encompass health care but the whole progressive/anti-federalist movement that has been enacted in law might probably be on the table (17th Amendment, stretchable interpretation of the constitution, clarification of things like Commerce, General Welfare). Politicians like power and state politicians are no different than their federal pals in this regard. Given the opportunity to take power back they will, just so long as it's not TOO Much (hard to argue since the Federal Government has taken a LOT in the last 100 years)
Slashdot Mirror
I know there is more than I think there is, but exactly how many games will be available via Steam on Linux? 2? 3?
We are.
What's the matter? Doesn't your job revolve around social networking sites and virtual worlds? No? Maybe you should get a cooler job.. :)
Access points every 10 feet :)
Technically there has been very little DRM (if any?) that is impervious. Methinks that bogus salespeople and lawyers are duping a lot of companies to BELIEVE that what they are selling actually works. They KNOW that the content holders are looking for a magic bullet to solve their "perceived" piracy problems (and I say "perceived" because I'm sure that's what the CEO's would like to be the problem because then they don't have to consider lowering prices). It's the same with companies making money saying they can do ANYTHING about P2P traffic. They can't do anything that seriously makes an impact and they know it, but knowing that record labels and movie film giants are loath to reduce prices they bait them into buying their product for $$$. It's a matter of the greedy bastards scamming greedy bastards.
Maybe, but it's against the law as well.
Flash is popular in so much as it can do things you can't do with a regular browser without add-ons. Adobe is getting nervous because the Web is catching up to their plugin. Period.
NSF is still reviewing it. They have not made a determination yet.
No, it's their network and their stupid rules. You can of course use your own laptop but if you want to use their network you have to abide by their rules.
I'd recommend getting a cell access point like verizon/sprint/something mifi. If they don't like you creating your own AP then tether it to a cell phone.
If you don't understand what I mean by "proxy" then watch the flash animation (no joke...real explanation and more)
http://www.isil.org/resources/philosophy-of-liberty-english.swf
I really HATE the fact that people actually believe that it's OK to mandate things as long as they or their proxy's are in charge.
Oh yes they CAN!!!
What? Don't agree? Well I'm sure we can settle this with a LAWSUIT!!! Muhaaawwaaaa!
They can if they are in China.
Yes, it's in the interest of society. They don't need them, just take them and give it to others....
What? That's not fair? Well of COURSE it's fair and as long as I am the person to implement it everything will be OK. Anybody who disagrees with this is OBVIOUSLY a nut case as rebalancing the fairness of internet addressing is in the public good and of course I'm only interested in the public good.
The road to Hell is paved with good intentions. God save me from people who would do good my name.
Although Apple's (The Steve's) plans are patently capitalistic and really have nothing to do with pushing standards unless they benefit Apple directly, I'd not shed a TEAR if flash went away. It's really hard to boo hoo for Adobe.
I'm not sure "Play" would be an accurate description...
Did you TRY going to the CNN website and doing HTML5 video?
What would be bad is if sites exclusively use HTML5 video for Ipad/iphone users ONLY and exclude PC/Mac/Linux users from accessing the HTML5 versions of the page. So far I've been unable to get the HTML 5 versions to work on my Mac. I hate flash, I hate the whole (execute a binary blob inside my browser). Java is still in that area but I'm less animated about that due to the fact that java is GPL'd.
Actually we have Mercantile Corporatism.
I'm trying REAL hard to remember if I ever took that dare myself...
Your Honor it was not my fault. The Earth's magnetic field in a fit of anomalous abnormally high activity a half-hour prior to the robbery compromised my frontal lobe's capacity to allow me to understand what I was going to do was wrong......
I choose to be a meat puppet over a vegetable or fungus puppet anyday
Wow...all those years of double daring my data center colleagues to put the hand electric de-gausser to their forehead and turn it on for 30 seconds might have more of an effect than I anticipated.....
I just blacked out! I had a dream/vision where I saw myself eating a meatloaf sandwitch and chips..oh..sorry..that's a TV show. Or is it?
Why they don't use freenet for this is beyond me. Yes, freenet is not lighting fast but it's getting better and it would be MUCH more difficult for anybody to get them if they used it.
http://freenetproject.org/
Actually, I've modified my thoughts on this slightly. You are correct though. Thing is, there are enough states willing to take this thing to court that one has to wonder what would happen if it's upheld by the court.
The court case could be a game of Chicken between the federal and state governments. By striking it down the court would KNOW that there might very well be enough states to either 1)propose and pass a constitutional amendment or...even more scary for the Federal Government...2) Convene a constitutional convention. The last time the states got close to doing that the federal government blinked big time. You could make the argument that they might uphold it actually encouraging the states to go the constitutional route (an opinion by Scalia, Roberts and Thomas could pour gasoline on the idea).
Generally the states are feckless but when you back somebody into a corner with no place to go, no place to run and no one to blame they might HAVE to. Given the public's mood state legislatures might swing HARD to republican/libertarian candidates. It all depends on when the case gets to the Supremes's (if ever). If it gets to the Supremes and there has been time for state legislatures to feel the effect of people feeling their only recourse against the Federal Government is there state governments then WATCH OUT!
I'd imagine that if a Constitutional Convention was proposed by state legislatures that have a republican/libertarian leaning it would not just encompass health care but the whole progressive /anti-federalist movement that has been enacted in law might probably be on the table (17th Amendment, stretchable interpretation of the constitution, clarification of things like Commerce, General Welfare). Politicians like power and state politicians are no different than their federal pals in this regard. Given the opportunity to take power back they will, just so long as it's not TOO Much (hard to argue since the Federal Government has taken a LOT in the last 100 years)