before you moderate me down, click on Yu Suzuki's User Info. You'll see his posts being trollish most of the time.
I'd hate to say it, but I suspect that Yu Suzuki just had his post moderated up, even though it's probably completely false. He's probably laughing very hard right now.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
Given that it's the Register for God's sake, we should take the news with a lot of salt. But their analysis seems well-founded, so Apple flirting with the idea of getting Mac OS X running on the x86 architecture doesn't seem too impossible. Getting Darwin to run on x86 is certainly a big step, and who knows - maybe Apple will get go the SGI-way of building highly-customized x86 machines if the IBM-Motorola partnership falls apart.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
I'm not surprised if Epic arrived at this decision as a result of lackluster enthusiasm from their Linux port of Unreal Tournament.
Their conclusion is probably because there's a huge overlap between Windows and Linux users (those who dual-boot to run Windows games), and it certainly doesn't make sense for them financially to support both platforms, since those dual-booting Linux users will buy their games anyways.
Besides, supporting DirectX only will get on Microsoft's good side, which leads to preferable treatment when the X-Box comes out. Remember, Microsoft will be the central authority for the X-box, as they have the right to issue an license for a game or not (unlike Windows). How does waiting two weeks for a X-box license sound, instead of waiting four months like the OpenGL-supporting id Software?
What this means is that you, as a gamer who wants to see games ported to Linux, should boycott game companies like Epic, who are departing platforms like the Mac and Linux for the greener pasture that is the X-Box. E-mail the developers at Epic that you refuse to dual-boot to Windows just to run their games, and that you will only choose games from developers that value the "right thing" over greed.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
What makes you assume these 200000 people won't just remove the Metallica songs from their share-lists before going back online? Very quickly after learning of this little game that Metallica's involved with, I did just that.
And why wouldn't Metallica be happy with your removing of their songs?
In fact, what you're doing is promoting the success of Metallica's doing. Expect more musicians to join the club, NetPD to make more money, and Napster to go out of business.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
If you would have read my reply to Capt. Beyond, you would know that an earlier CNET article mentioned their delivering the list of users in paper format.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
From a Napster page (sounds like they got the list of users from just simple querying):
Q: What information has Napster received from Metallica?
A: Metallica delivered a computerized list of 317,377 distinct usernames to be banned from Napster. The list contained usernames, filenames of allegedly infringing music for each user, time, date, and the IP address of the Napster server to which the user was connected. That information did not contain the user's IP address or personal information. Metallica has stated that it intends to limit the scope of its notification to commercially released Metallica albums, making "no claim of infringement with respect to recordings of songs made by fans at Metallica live concerts."
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
Not exactly. But even if that's true, you just got yourself 300,000 pissed off Napster users. Three quarters of them probably got another account right away. The rest probably looked into other file-sharing programs, like iMesh, CuteMX, and Gnutella.
Now imagine if Metallica gives them another 200,000 names next week. Rinse, dry, and repeat. And perhaps, other musicians will join in.
I still think what Metallica doing is ingenious (I think what they're doing is evil, but still ingenious) - by calling Napster's bluff, they showed other musicians that:
1) you can waste many man-hours of Napster Inc, especially when you deliver them 300,000 usernames on hard copy.
2) create a massive inconvenience for Napster users, which might drive them away to other solutions, and decrease Napster Inc's revenues.
I guess Napster won't be having their IPO anytime soon. Doh.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
It doesn't have to stand in court. It's Napster's own policy that's biting them back. Since Napster promised to remove any specified user's account per the artist's request, if Metallica comes back after a couple of weeks, looks up any of 300,000 users and finds out that metallica mp3s are still being offered, Napster is going to face more trouble in court.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
Also, without revealing their methods, it seems like there is a real possibility that they're doing packet sniffing, which would be a violation of the law, constituting illegal search, or they're posing as napster clients, letting people download which, while not entrapment, as they're not a law enforcement agency (among other reasons) is just as illegal as the person downloading them.
It's very likely you're overestimating the technology behind NetPD.
My guess is that they simply queried for the names "Metallica", parsed the search results, and queried each request to get the username holding the song. Rinse and repeat for each Napster server. It's not like you don't already know the username when you download an mp3.
There wouldn't be anything illegal about that, and they don't really have to resort to methods like packet-sniffing and eavesdropping, which would probably be pretty controversial.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
The rationale for catridges was not security. Slot I catridges were introduced for the Pentium II, which had their L2 caches off die, because of the inability to keep the cache on die while keeping the costs low. Wrapping a catridge around the circuit board was simply for aesthetics and durability, so less people will break it by accident (similar to why console games have plastic casings wrapping their games). It was never designed to be a tamper-proof mechanism.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
No one is stamping out bogus Athlons in some secret chip fab in Mexico. Those Athlon CPUs are actually remarked CPUs that are overclocked past their actual make. For example, some evil retailer remarks their Athlon 550 to a Athlon 700 will make a hefty sum.
I wish they actually disclosed the name of the retailer. Such retailers hurt customers AND AMD, and their names should be widely known and disclosed.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
I'm going to post a bunch of mp3 files with song names of Britney Spears, Boyz2Men, BackStreetBoys, and all that, and post a Hall of Lame of those people that actually thought those songs were good! muahahah
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
Given that this system has the potential to be implemented in such a way as to be openly accessible rather than limited to a set userbase, and that was what HeUnique seemed to be implying, that was why I wrote what I did. What it is now is not what it could be in the future, and this type of mechanism can be implemented in other distributed networks as well. And given that the content it stores does not necessarily have to be scientific journals, I think my point does apply.
Huh?
This kind of sychonizing mechanism is already implemented in all sorts of distributed networks. Any rudimentary distributed file system (i.e. Coda) will perform such necessary synchronizations with each other. The point is the LOCKSS was never intended to be an truly-open-free-for-all system, and it respects copyrights by staying that way.
No one in their right mind would creating a Napster-like sharing program that automatically synchronizes files with many other users and implement a cache that NEVER erases (after all, isn't that your whole point about it better than FreeNet?)
I said it before, and I'll say it again - it's an apples-to-orange comparison. Given any sufficient and effort and time, any software system has the potential to do possibly anything. Saying this system has the potential to be a better FreeNet is akin to say ICQ has the potential to be a better OS, if "implemented" in such a way. The goals of FreeNet and LOCKSS are fundamentally different in every sense, and forcing one to be another would just give you a complex and inefficient hack of a system.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
The purpose of LOCKSS, as described on its homepage, is to keep archived copies of scientific journals to prevent them disappearing for good, since there are no physically distributed copies. In essence, it's a online archival system that caches jounrnals for libraries that implement them.
Hence, it would be an apples-to-oranges comparison to compare LOCKSS to Napster or FreeNet, which are meant to provide a more dynamic sharing service with other users on the Internet.
In fact, from the FAQ, it seems that LOCKSS can't be accessed from outside the implementating facility (it only caches the journals libraries subscribe to), so your whole concern is really moot.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
[i think the word you wanted there was "tripe"... and your point 1 is a completly unsupported assertion. anarchist? yea, leaning that way... but tripe? support your position or go away... and do you actually think that an action is wrong simply because its a crime? gee zus key riest...]
Go look up the dictionary for "trite", instead of twisting my posts because you can't understand the word.
oh, but it does. thats the problem with "intellectual property." anyone can just trample all over (most of) it! (i make an exception for true well-kept trade secrets, etc...) here's a USEFUL definition of property for ya to chew on: "your property is whatever you can prevent other people from using." you don't have to like it, but really, its a situational given. if you disagree, state your reasoning.]
Here's a clue for you - just because you can definite the word "property", it doesn't mean that intellectual property means the same thing, but with intellectual ideas. Copyright laws in America (and most of the countries) give creators of intellectual property rights to do whatever they want with their creations. According to your twisted definition, I can trample all over GPL if I want.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
I guess I shouldn't even be responding to a flamebait like you, but I'm looking for a place to vent my bad mood.
1) anarchist trite.
2) no. If you have intellectual property, you should have the right to do whatever you want with it. Just because some/. zealot doesn't agree with it doesn't mean he can trample all over your IP.
3) but certainly some shouting moron in all caps is definitely one.
4) typical swearing dumbass.
5) stop shouting, it's rude. And you're insulting Mr. Slippery to consider your post even remotely similar to his. At least his showed that it wasn't written by a moron.
Moderate at will,
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
We're all criminals already, so why is someone who wants to make a copy of a song for his mom going to be stopped at the thought that he's breaking the law?
Oh, please prove to me how many Napster users are sharing their files out for their mom.
Next time I do my speeding on the highway, I'll remind the cop that I already failed to count the 20 dollars I got from my grandma for income tax, and he should give me a break. I'm going to go steal a piece of candy, got caught, and rob a bank later, only to be excused because I was a criminal already, no need for reminding me.
I hate SDMI just like anyone else, but certainly crying anarchy and stealing music isn't the best way to solve the problem.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
Oh, I see, you're using "pirate" in the incorrect and prejudicial sense of "one who makes an unauthorized copy". How in the world the same term should apply to copying as to murder, rape, and theft on the high seas is beyond me.
The correct term is "copyright infringement", and yes, it's actually a crime. You're taking an original creation someone else made and redistribute it without permission. The sad thing is that most people assume an attitude like yours, and think that copyright infringement is "no big deal". Quite obvious that you haven't produced much valuable Intellectual Property of your own - otherwise you might respect other's copyright a bit more.
But considering that CD sales are up, it's hard to even argue that potential profits were lost
So if I'm now making a thousand dollars per month, instead of ten thousand dollars per month, I shouldn't be whining?
Whatever, forget it - I'm starting to accept the reality that a lot of posters here make nonsensical comments for the benefit of OPEN SOURCE, INFORMATION WANTS TO BE FREE, and the like. I think I'm going to go now to rat on a few IRC mp3 leeches to the RIAA just to piss you zealots off.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
I submitted the SAME EXACT STORY this morning at 6am, with complete links to the amd website, duron web page, duron press release. 10 hours after my submission got rejected, I see this.
Slashdot admins - I know you guys don't read this, since you guys make so many double posts, but if the rare chance that you do see this post, read this - you're not encouraging people to submit news. Eventually all the people that send you timely and interesting news are going to quit out of frustration, and you're going to only get hot grits news submissions.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
Doh! Should have sued him a long time ago!
on
Sim Plague
·
· Score: 2
I should have kept a tab of all those times when all those earthquakes, tornados, UFOs, Godzilla attacked my peaceful SimCity town. Damn you Maxis! You owe me BIG!
On a more serious note, I don't think it's "damage " when your game character dies. You might as well sue him for not making the Sim guy live forever.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
Slashdot Mirror
I'd hate to say it, but I suspect that Yu Suzuki just had his post moderated up, even though it's probably completely false. He's probably laughing very hard right now.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
Mr Hankey would be a great assistant for MS Office, because the MS Office assistant really is a piece of shit.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
Motorola, IBM - cold warriors
Darwin on x86 - Apple's Intel interest
Given that it's the Register for God's sake, we should take the news with a lot of salt. But their analysis seems well-founded, so Apple flirting with the idea of getting Mac OS X running on the x86 architecture doesn't seem too impossible. Getting Darwin to run on x86 is certainly a big step, and who knows - maybe Apple will get go the SGI-way of building highly-customized x86 machines if the IBM-Motorola partnership falls apart.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
Don't you think we could learn from that to improve computer science?
When I look at that, I'm not sure if it's beautiful, and nor am I sure that computer science will improve if we make it look more like him.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
Their conclusion is probably because there's a huge overlap between Windows and Linux users (those who dual-boot to run Windows games), and it certainly doesn't make sense for them financially to support both platforms, since those dual-booting Linux users will buy their games anyways.
Besides, supporting DirectX only will get on Microsoft's good side, which leads to preferable treatment when the X-Box comes out. Remember, Microsoft will be the central authority for the X-box, as they have the right to issue an license for a game or not (unlike Windows). How does waiting two weeks for a X-box license sound, instead of waiting four months like the OpenGL-supporting id Software?
What this means is that you, as a gamer who wants to see games ported to Linux, should boycott game companies like Epic, who are departing platforms like the Mac and Linux for the greener pasture that is the X-Box. E-mail the developers at Epic that you refuse to dual-boot to Windows just to run their games, and that you will only choose games from developers that value the "right thing" over greed.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
You haven't checked for a LONG time.
LAME 3.52beta November 8 1999
By permission of copyright holders of all GPL code in LAME, all GPL code is now released under a modified version of the LGPL (see the README file)
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
And why wouldn't Metallica be happy with your removing of their songs?
In fact, what you're doing is promoting the success of Metallica's doing. Expect more musicians to join the club, NetPD to make more money, and Napster to go out of business.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
If you would have read my reply to Capt. Beyond, you would know that an earlier CNET article mentioned their delivering the list of users in paper format.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
yeah - doh! (blame CNET - they talked about how it was delivered on paper only)
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
Q: What information has Napster received from Metallica?
A: Metallica delivered a computerized list of 317,377 distinct usernames to be banned from Napster. The list contained usernames, filenames of allegedly infringing music for each user, time, date, and the IP address of the Napster server to which the user was connected. That information did not contain the user's IP address or personal information. Metallica has stated that it intends to limit the scope of its notification to commercially released Metallica albums, making "no claim of infringement with respect to recordings of songs made by fans at Metallica live concerts."
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
Not exactly. But even if that's true, you just got yourself 300,000 pissed off Napster users. Three quarters of them probably got another account right away. The rest probably looked into other file-sharing programs, like iMesh, CuteMX, and Gnutella.
Now imagine if Metallica gives them another 200,000 names next week. Rinse, dry, and repeat. And perhaps, other musicians will join in.
I still think what Metallica doing is ingenious (I think what they're doing is evil, but still ingenious) - by calling Napster's bluff, they showed other musicians that:
1) you can waste many man-hours of Napster Inc, especially when you deliver them 300,000 usernames on hard copy.
2) create a massive inconvenience for Napster users, which might drive them away to other solutions, and decrease Napster Inc's revenues.
I guess Napster won't be having their IPO anytime soon. Doh.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
It doesn't have to stand in court. It's Napster's own policy that's biting them back. Since Napster promised to remove any specified user's account per the artist's request, if Metallica comes back after a couple of weeks, looks up any of 300,000 users and finds out that metallica mp3s are still being offered, Napster is going to face more trouble in court.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
It's very likely you're overestimating the technology behind NetPD.
My guess is that they simply queried for the names "Metallica", parsed the search results, and queried each request to get the username holding the song. Rinse and repeat for each Napster server. It's not like you don't already know the username when you download an mp3.
There wouldn't be anything illegal about that, and they don't really have to resort to methods like packet-sniffing and eavesdropping, which would probably be pretty controversial.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
The rationale for catridges was not security. Slot I catridges were introduced for the Pentium II, which had their L2 caches off die, because of the inability to keep the cache on die while keeping the costs low. Wrapping a catridge around the circuit board was simply for aesthetics and durability, so less people will break it by accident (similar to why console games have plastic casings wrapping their games). It was never designed to be a tamper-proof mechanism.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
I wish they actually disclosed the name of the retailer. Such retailers hurt customers AND AMD, and their names should be widely known and disclosed.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
I'm going to post a bunch of mp3 files with song names of Britney Spears, Boyz2Men, BackStreetBoys, and all that, and post a Hall of Lame of those people that actually thought those songs were good! muahahah
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
Huh?
This kind of sychonizing mechanism is already implemented in all sorts of distributed networks. Any rudimentary distributed file system (i.e. Coda) will perform such necessary synchronizations with each other. The point is the LOCKSS was never intended to be an truly-open-free-for-all system, and it respects copyrights by staying that way.
No one in their right mind would creating a Napster-like sharing program that automatically synchronizes files with many other users and implement a cache that NEVER erases (after all, isn't that your whole point about it better than FreeNet?)
I said it before, and I'll say it again - it's an apples-to-orange comparison. Given any sufficient and effort and time, any software system has the potential to do possibly anything. Saying this system has the potential to be a better FreeNet is akin to say ICQ has the potential to be a better OS, if "implemented" in such a way. The goals of FreeNet and LOCKSS are fundamentally different in every sense, and forcing one to be another would just give you a complex and inefficient hack of a system.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
Hence, it would be an apples-to-oranges comparison to compare LOCKSS to Napster or FreeNet, which are meant to provide a more dynamic sharing service with other users on the Internet.
In fact, from the FAQ, it seems that LOCKSS can't be accessed from outside the implementating facility (it only caches the journals libraries subscribe to), so your whole concern is really moot.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
Go look up the dictionary for "trite", instead of twisting my posts because you can't understand the word.
oh, but it does. thats the problem with "intellectual property." anyone can just trample all over (most of) it! (i make an exception for true well-kept trade secrets, etc...) here's a USEFUL definition of property for ya to chew on: "your property is whatever you can prevent other people from using." you don't have to like it, but really, its a situational given. if you disagree, state your reasoning.]
Here's a clue for you - just because you can definite the word "property", it doesn't mean that intellectual property means the same thing, but with intellectual ideas. Copyright laws in America (and most of the countries) give creators of intellectual property rights to do whatever they want with their creations. According to your twisted definition, I can trample all over GPL if I want.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
1) anarchist trite.
2) no. If you have intellectual property, you should have the right to do whatever you want with it. Just because some /. zealot doesn't agree with it doesn't mean he can trample all over your IP.
3) but certainly some shouting moron in all caps is definitely one.
4) typical swearing dumbass.
5) stop shouting, it's rude. And you're insulting Mr. Slippery to consider your post even remotely similar to his. At least his showed that it wasn't written by a moron.
Moderate at will,
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
Oh, please prove to me how many Napster users are sharing their files out for their mom.
Next time I do my speeding on the highway, I'll remind the cop that I already failed to count the 20 dollars I got from my grandma for income tax, and he should give me a break. I'm going to go steal a piece of candy, got caught, and rob a bank later, only to be excused because I was a criminal already, no need for reminding me.
I hate SDMI just like anyone else, but certainly crying anarchy and stealing music isn't the best way to solve the problem.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
Your logic seems to say that just because RIAA makes bad excuses for not making enough money, it's ok for us to pirate. Sure smart guy.
I don't see how that's a justification for people infringing on other's copyright.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
The correct term is "copyright infringement", and yes, it's actually a crime. You're taking an original creation someone else made and redistribute it without permission. The sad thing is that most people assume an attitude like yours, and think that copyright infringement is "no big deal". Quite obvious that you haven't produced much valuable Intellectual Property of your own - otherwise you might respect other's copyright a bit more.
But considering that CD sales are up, it's hard to even argue that potential profits were lost
So if I'm now making a thousand dollars per month, instead of ten thousand dollars per month, I shouldn't be whining?
Whatever, forget it - I'm starting to accept the reality that a lot of posters here make nonsensical comments for the benefit of OPEN SOURCE, INFORMATION WANTS TO BE FREE, and the like. I think I'm going to go now to rat on a few IRC mp3 leeches to the RIAA just to piss you zealots off.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
Slashdot admins - I know you guys don't read this, since you guys make so many double posts, but if the rare chance that you do see this post, read this - you're not encouraging people to submit news. Eventually all the people that send you timely and interesting news are going to quit out of frustration, and you're going to only get hot grits news submissions.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)
On a more serious note, I don't think it's "damage " when your game character dies. You might as well sue him for not making the Sim guy live forever.
Go get your free Palm V (25 referrals needed only!)