And more to the point. In the Old Media, there were people to whom you were held accountable. Now in the New Media, while I believe no one would argue that editors should follow basic journalist ethics and principles... how do you enforce them, if they DON'T follow them?
But I guess the question lies, is anonymity enoforcable? If I try to be anonymous, does that mean I should legally be anonymous, even if they can find out who I was (via IP addresses, logs, etc)?
Sure. Why not?
People keep making a big deal about the DMCA saying that "Effectively" controls access (and the jokes about how in-effective CCA's CCS has been, as well as the scheme itself being poor encryption). But its been pointed out repeatedly that the word "Effective" means that a serious attempt has been made (or some such leagal nonsense. IANAL... and I don't play one on TV). If thats true though, then shouldn't an "Effective" attempt at maintaining ones anonymity be allowed to leagaly protect ones identity from further intrusion?;)
Okay,
I can understand the use of allowing the user to update the data (for LOTS of reasons).
Fine HTML doesn't keep state (I won't argue about how to do this).
Why trust the prices that have been in the user's care? Why not simply discard all the description/pricing information, and just use catalog numbers and quantity from the shopping cart, and pull the rest from your own internal database, for the final bill (preperatory to paying?) Then, keep that information in a record number, and just pass the record number to the next step? Don't let the user play with the data once they come to the final checkout screen.
It doesn't matter that the copy protection is worthless.
Thanks to the equally worthless DMCA (a most agregeous piece of tripe, and a good example of why all officials in office when it passed should be ousted, since they refused to do a roll-call vote and specify who was involved), cracking the protection scheme, and possibly, distributing the crack, are now illegal (within the U.S. anyway).
What the end results of all this mean, depend on how the DeCSS trials go.
A silver cloud in this lining; this will prevent companies from snapping up all the domains that match thier company name, i.e. foo.com, foo.org, etc...
MicroSoft : We need to hang on to MicroSoft.org (which doesn't seem to have a DNS entry BTW)
Lawyers : No prob... we just start up the MicroSoft Envangelical Non-Profit Organization, funded by an Endowment from MicroSoft Inc., who buys the MicroSoft.org domain, and, in the interests of their organization, links it directly to the MicroSoft.com web site (and distributes an e-mail newsletter once a month saying how great MS is, and all the good its done in the world). Best part is, its tax deductable for MicroSoft Inc.
"Don't let Microsoft control your computer. Use Bob's OS instead" But there was no choice.
No kidding... Microsoft aquired that too. Remember MS-BOB? Sure sign of a monopoly when they aquire their competition (BOB OS) and then just repackage it with their name!:)
... this is the equivalent of the bulk-email programs, but targeted at the patent office.
Great idea! Lets couple their software with an e-mail mailbox. Have it generate a patent form automagically and forward it to the patent office whenever it is geenrated, then sign up the mailbox on lots of junk mail forms.
If you thought the PTO was out of control before... wait to you see what they churn out now!
Patents for getting rich while you work at home, patents for seeing hot girls have sex with each other, patents for getting a low interest loan... the possibilities are endless!
I agree... Its rediculous, the sarcasm was ment about the way that this would be explained, not the fact that this intrusive piece of tripe (CPRM) would be harmful to a persons rights.
I remember for the last few years feeling a sense of dread as 2001 aproached. Not "end of the millenium" blues, just "unrealized potential".
It makes me sad that as a society we seem to have no desire to push pioneer anything anymore. Granted the frontiers have gotten tougher to reach (sail across the void vs. sail across the ocean), and the challenges are more technologically demanding (single stage to orbit vs. what longitude/lattitude am I at), and that only a small percentage of people actually took the challenge to explore...
Ah heck. This is getting me too depressed, I'm just going to keep thinking about the Pan-Am logo on the side of the 2001 orbiter and smile.
Re:Martian Chronicles happens now
on
The Dot in .mars
·
· Score: 2
yes... but he had people landing there.
Re:Line 365 from net/ipv4/tcp_timer.c
on
The Dot in .mars
·
· Score: 2
He just mentioned that they were going to translate it to an IP stack:)
A VCR (Tivo) where you can't share the tapes you have, and you can't see them on any other machine, thus 'justifying' the technology in the eyes of politicians and the courts, since it will only be harmful to people who want to trade in illegally recorded programs, not those engaged in legal 'time shifting'.
Of course, it won't be long before every appliance has built in advertising. You'll have a flat LCD screen attached to your fridge that runs ads 24/7...ugh.
When 24/7 banner adds are mandated by law on my fridge, then only outlaws will have spray paint to cover them up.
Its a quote from the short lived "The Big Guy and Rusty the Boy Robot" (based on the comic book by the same name). The series lasted for 6 episodes (maybe 8, I'll have to check) on FOX Kids a year or so back. The basic premise is that in the 70s/80s (although the 'tech style' looks more like a style-istic 50s) the army created a robot to protect the world from aliens and other monsters/evil menaces. It was supposed to be automated but the Artificial Inteligence wasn't up to snuff (cute scene where they ask the robot "How many fingers am I holding up?" to which he replies "Tuesday"). The army makes it a piloted vehicle... but thats on a need to know basis only, as far as everyone else knows, its just a big robot (hence "The Big Guy"). Flash forward to 'now'. A company finally puts together a fully functional A.I. and a new robot with a learning neural net, thats still kind of new at the job of defending the earth (hence "Rusty the Boy Robot"), who ends up as the "Big Guys" side-kick (he Idolizes the big guy and wants to grow up to be just like him).
The quote comes from the head of the corporation that built rusty addressing the scientist who built him, right after Rusty went charging into a situation and got badly clobered... repeatedly.:)
If you can find a copy of it, its rather funny and entertaining. Too bad the Saban (the E-Bola virus of Childrens Programming) was(is?) in charge of the Fox Kids programming line-up and nixed it.
I love the question of the poll on the front page:
"Was Microsoft the victim of a Biased trial?"
Gee... before or after the purjured themselves in front of the Judge? Repeatedly?
Current results:
Yes = 65%
No = 35%
(I voted no, which of course means they got a fair trial and should be split apart into lots of itty bitty MSs that can be auctioned on E-bay for $5 a pop::grin:: )
They could adopt is and optimize it for use with their products. What they couldn't do (according to their contract with Sun, as interpreted by the courts) is drop the part of the implimentation that allowed the code to remain portable, and then still call it Java.
If they had just optimized it for Win32, then no Sun and MS wouldn't have been in court. When they made it so that code compiled for "Java" (as MS implimented it) couldn't run on any other JVM, then they deserved to find themselves in court.
The MSDN tries to do what OpenSource does. Make the development platform and tools available to the developers at a minimal cost.
The term minimal is relative of course. I only ended up with a nice and legal copy of MSVC++ 6.0 because a friend had accidentally gotten an extra copy, and gifted it to me. Otherwise I would be trying to get GCC and MING running on MS. Heaven forbid I would use an illegal copy of MS's software. Of course if you are doing serious developement work, then MSDN might be nice to subscribe to (free tools/test platforms), but for my minimal effort the coast just doesn't pay.:)
Now that I have it though, I am using it to produce code that uses OpenSource libraries and tools. My goal is to put out a game or two (in my spare time, hence it being a goal and not a Project Plan or a Buisness Model::grin::), learn a bit about cross-platform coding, and brush up on my C/C++ along the way.
Why not just use Linux?
My main machine is dual boot Linux/Windows.
I've found for me, that working on one platform consistently is the easiest thing for developement. Otherwise I spend half my time just re-orienting myself within my environment. For my Perl development, I use Linux... almost exclusively for the major developement. For my C/C++, at least for now, I use windows because some of the people I'm working with are on Windows also, so its easier to swap around files if we all use a consistent platform, and for me to be able to send them Binaries to look at (and they are non-techie graphic people, not programmers, so Linux isn't as much of an option for them... yet).
How long do you really think it will take before someone figures the scheme out?
And how long after that before the latest bug in IE or Outlook allows a virus that effectively (to use the word in its real meaning, instead of its DMCA legal meaning) scrambles the user interface like spaghetti. I hope Whistler has a 'Safe Mode' since it doesn't have the ability to boot to DOS to fix things up.
Oh, and the reason that MS isn't releasing the specs? So they can say "Oh those terrible hackers! Those awfull Open Source people!" (yes, we'll be lumped in there). "They went ahead and went around our backs to break our Theming Scheme! We did this for YOUR protection, and what did they do? They stole our scheme and made viruses to harm you! Its all THEIR fault!"
And the public will buy it, instead of wondering why the bugs existed, and without wondering if an open review of the structure could have prevented this mess.
I realise I'm probably alone, and I believe the idea would need to be fleshed out more, but I wish I had moderator points right now [+1 Interesting/Insightful] (on the parent of course).
I also realise that implimenting a UPL would (in many people's eyes) be comparable to the submarine patents that have popped up recently, however that is not necessarily so. For one thing, any software already out there, is out there. This is the nature of the GPL. You couldn't just turn back the clock on it, so as opposed to submarine patents, you wouldn't be yanking the rug out from under them. You would just be revoking a license for the new and improved version (with the 'new and improved' license). This would also prevent it from having any teeth for a few years (although if it were implimented before the 64bit x86 replacements are, that would be a time of forced upgrade for most servers).
Not sure if it would help in the long run, and I'm sure it would devide the community, but I for one am getting fed up with watching our rights getting trampled one by one, while we keep fighting the system from the inside. At a certain point you need to stop passively resisting, and start actively resisting.
Um... I hate to break it to you but even MoO3 is starting to lean toward RTS-hood. The combat will take place similar to Harpoon (continuous time, but lots of time to do things).
Slashdot Mirror
I agree. If you live in this man's district read some of his papers and let him know what you think.
:)
Its amazing to see a congressman who actually DOES get it.
Can we clone him and have the clones run for the rest of the seats in Congress?
(Yes... I know that we would have to find some way of transfering his brain-patterns also... but just go with it for now)
And more to the point. In the Old Media, there were people to whom you were held accountable. Now in the New Media, while I believe no one would argue that editors should follow basic journalist ethics and principles... how do you enforce them, if they DON'T follow them?
They definately revealed some real problems in a second test... I wonder how MS vs Linux would do in Round 3?
A series of tests covering different hardware configurations...
1) Single processor File/Print/Web/FTP server
2) Dual processor
3) Quad processor
4) Oct processor (we do claim to do eight with 2.4... right?)
I'd be real curious how 2.4 stacks up to the Y2K bug... I mean Win2K
But I guess the question lies, is anonymity enoforcable? If I try to be anonymous, does that mean I should legally be anonymous, even if they can find out who I was (via IP addresses, logs, etc)?
;)
Sure. Why not?
People keep making a big deal about the DMCA saying that "Effectively" controls access (and the jokes about how in-effective CCA's CCS has been, as well as the scheme itself being poor encryption). But its been pointed out repeatedly that the word "Effective" means that a serious attempt has been made (or some such leagal nonsense. IANAL... and I don't play one on TV). If thats true though, then shouldn't an "Effective" attempt at maintaining ones anonymity be allowed to leagaly protect ones identity from further intrusion?
Okay,
I can understand the use of allowing the user to update the data (for LOTS of reasons).
Fine HTML doesn't keep state (I won't argue about how to do this).
Why trust the prices that have been in the user's care? Why not simply discard all the description/pricing information, and just use catalog numbers and quantity from the shopping cart, and pull the rest from your own internal database, for the final bill (preperatory to paying?) Then, keep that information in a record number, and just pass the record number to the next step? Don't let the user play with the data once they come to the final checkout screen.
It doesn't matter that the copy protection is worthless.
Thanks to the equally worthless DMCA (a most agregeous piece of tripe, and a good example of why all officials in office when it passed should be ousted, since they refused to do a roll-call vote and specify who was involved), cracking the protection scheme, and possibly, distributing the crack, are now illegal (within the U.S. anyway).
What the end results of all this mean, depend on how the DeCSS trials go.
I agree.
Someone marked me down as Flamebait also.
Offtopic I can understand.
Over-rated I could understand.
Troll I would accept (but not agree with).
But Flamebait?
The "Plain Old Text" and "Extrans" tags are swapped in the listbox.
Not sure why this was never fixed.
A silver cloud in this lining; this will prevent companies from snapping up all the domains that match thier company name, i.e. foo.com, foo.org, etc...
MicroSoft : We need to hang on to MicroSoft.org (which doesn't seem to have a DNS entry BTW)
Lawyers : No prob... we just start up the MicroSoft Envangelical Non-Profit Organization, funded by an Endowment from MicroSoft Inc., who buys the MicroSoft.org domain, and, in the interests of their organization, links it directly to the MicroSoft.com web site (and distributes an e-mail newsletter once a month saying how great MS is, and all the good its done in the world). Best part is, its tax deductable for MicroSoft Inc.
"Don't let Microsoft control your computer. Use Bob's OS instead" But there was no choice.
:)
No kidding... Microsoft aquired that too. Remember MS-BOB? Sure sign of a monopoly when they aquire their competition (BOB OS) and then just repackage it with their name!
... this is the equivalent of the bulk-email programs, but targeted at the patent office.
Great idea! Lets couple their software with an e-mail mailbox. Have it generate a patent form automagically and forward it to the patent office whenever it is geenrated, then sign up the mailbox on lots of junk mail forms.
If you thought the PTO was out of control before... wait to you see what they churn out now!
Patents for getting rich while you work at home, patents for seeing hot girls have sex with each other, patents for getting a low interest loan... the possibilities are endless!
No! I mean it! They JUST WON'T STOP!!!
...please make them stop...
>;)
I agree... Its rediculous, the sarcasm was ment about the way that this would be explained, not the fact that this intrusive piece of tripe (CPRM) would be harmful to a persons rights.
Sorry it wasn't clearer.
True.
I remember for the last few years feeling a sense of dread as 2001 aproached. Not "end of the millenium" blues, just "unrealized potential".
It makes me sad that as a society we seem to have no desire to push pioneer anything anymore. Granted the frontiers have gotten tougher to reach (sail across the void vs. sail across the ocean), and the challenges are more technologically demanding (single stage to orbit vs. what longitude/lattitude am I at), and that only a small percentage of people actually took the challenge to explore...
Ah heck. This is getting me too depressed, I'm just going to keep thinking about the Pan-Am logo on the side of the 2001 orbiter and smile.
yes... but he had people landing there.
He just mentioned that they were going to translate it to an IP stack :)
:)
Personally I vote for ICP/IP
(Interplanetary Control Protocol over IP)
or maybe TCP/IP/ICP
A VCR (Tivo) where you can't share the tapes you have, and you can't see them on any other machine, thus 'justifying' the technology in the eyes of politicians and the courts, since it will only be harmful to people who want to trade in illegally recorded programs, not those engaged in legal 'time shifting'.
(/sarcasm)
Of course, it won't be long before every appliance has built in advertising. You'll have a flat LCD screen attached to your fridge that runs ads 24/7...ugh.
When 24/7 banner adds are mandated by law on my fridge, then only outlaws will have spray paint to cover them up.
Its a quote from the short lived "The Big Guy and Rusty the Boy Robot" (based on the comic book by the same name). The series lasted for 6 episodes (maybe 8, I'll have to check) on FOX Kids a year or so back. The basic premise is that in the 70s/80s (although the 'tech style' looks more like a style-istic 50s) the army created a robot to protect the world from aliens and other monsters/evil menaces. It was supposed to be automated but the Artificial Inteligence wasn't up to snuff (cute scene where they ask the robot "How many fingers am I holding up?" to which he replies "Tuesday"). The army makes it a piloted vehicle... but thats on a need to know basis only, as far as everyone else knows, its just a big robot (hence "The Big Guy"). Flash forward to 'now'. A company finally puts together a fully functional A.I. and a new robot with a learning neural net, thats still kind of new at the job of defending the earth (hence "Rusty the Boy Robot"), who ends up as the "Big Guys" side-kick (he Idolizes the big guy and wants to grow up to be just like him).
:)
The quote comes from the head of the corporation that built rusty addressing the scientist who built him, right after Rusty went charging into a situation and got badly clobered... repeatedly.
Hope that helps,
The requisite IMDB link is Here.
If you can find a copy of it, its rather funny and entertaining. Too bad the Saban (the E-Bola virus of Childrens Programming) was(is?) in charge of the Fox Kids programming line-up and nixed it.
I love the question of the poll on the front page:
::grin:: )
"Was Microsoft the victim of a Biased trial?"
Gee... before or after the purjured themselves in front of the Judge? Repeatedly?
Current results:
Yes = 65%
No = 35%
(I voted no, which of course means they got a fair trial and should be split apart into lots of itty bitty MSs that can be auctioned on E-bay for $5 a pop
They could adopt is and optimize it for use with their products. What they couldn't do (according to their contract with Sun, as interpreted by the courts) is drop the part of the implimentation that allowed the code to remain portable, and then still call it Java.
If they had just optimized it for Win32, then no Sun and MS wouldn't have been in court. When they made it so that code compiled for "Java" (as MS implimented it) couldn't run on any other JVM, then they deserved to find themselves in court.
The MSDN tries to do what OpenSource does. Make the development platform and tools available to the developers at a minimal cost.
:)
::grin::), learn a bit about cross-platform coding, and brush up on my C/C++ along the way.
The term minimal is relative of course. I only ended up with a nice and legal copy of MSVC++ 6.0 because a friend had accidentally gotten an extra copy, and gifted it to me. Otherwise I would be trying to get GCC and MING running on MS. Heaven forbid I would use an illegal copy of MS's software. Of course if you are doing serious developement work, then MSDN might be nice to subscribe to (free tools/test platforms), but for my minimal effort the coast just doesn't pay.
Now that I have it though, I am using it to produce code that uses OpenSource libraries and tools. My goal is to put out a game or two (in my spare time, hence it being a goal and not a Project Plan or a Buisness Model
Why not just use Linux?
My main machine is dual boot Linux/Windows.
I've found for me, that working on one platform consistently is the easiest thing for developement. Otherwise I spend half my time just re-orienting myself within my environment. For my Perl development, I use Linux... almost exclusively for the major developement. For my C/C++, at least for now, I use windows because some of the people I'm working with are on Windows also, so its easier to swap around files if we all use a consistent platform, and for me to be able to send them Binaries to look at (and they are non-techie graphic people, not programmers, so Linux isn't as much of an option for them... yet).
For dolphins, the primary route to assimilate information is via sound.
;)
Perhaps they could use blind people.
Somehow I don't think the "Seeing Eye Dolphin" would really catch on. What? You ment...
Oh. Never Mind.
How long do you really think it will take before someone figures the scheme out?
And how long after that before the latest bug in IE or Outlook allows a virus that effectively (to use the word in its real meaning, instead of its DMCA legal meaning) scrambles the user interface like spaghetti. I hope Whistler has a 'Safe Mode' since it doesn't have the ability to boot to DOS to fix things up.
Oh, and the reason that MS isn't releasing the specs? So they can say "Oh those terrible hackers! Those awfull Open Source people!" (yes, we'll be lumped in there). "They went ahead and went around our backs to break our Theming Scheme! We did this for YOUR protection, and what did they do? They stole our scheme and made viruses to harm you! Its all THEIR fault!"
And the public will buy it, instead of wondering why the bugs existed, and without wondering if an open review of the structure could have prevented this mess.
I realise I'm probably alone, and I believe the idea would need to be fleshed out more, but I wish I had moderator points right now [+1 Interesting/Insightful] (on the parent of course).
I also realise that implimenting a UPL would (in many people's eyes) be comparable to the submarine patents that have popped up recently, however that is not necessarily so. For one thing, any software already out there, is out there. This is the nature of the GPL. You couldn't just turn back the clock on it, so as opposed to submarine patents, you wouldn't be yanking the rug out from under them. You would just be revoking a license for the new and improved version (with the 'new and improved' license). This would also prevent it from having any teeth for a few years (although if it were implimented before the 64bit x86 replacements are, that would be a time of forced upgrade for most servers).
Not sure if it would help in the long run, and I'm sure it would devide the community, but I for one am getting fed up with watching our rights getting trampled one by one, while we keep fighting the system from the inside. At a certain point you need to stop passively resisting, and start actively resisting.
Let's see... Civ 3 and MOO 3 are coming out soon,
Um... I hate to break it to you but even MoO3 is starting to lean toward RTS-hood. The combat will take place similar to Harpoon (continuous time, but lots of time to do things).