They're still going to be held liable for their past actions. If I commit a major robbery in the US and flee to Mexico, if they catch me, they will extradite me, if I set foot back in the country before the statute of limitations expires the potential for penalty for the crime, they'll arrest me all the same.
If they move it to India or elsewhere, unless they honor the terms laid down by the government for their infractions, etc. their products will be banned from import into the US.
This thing can be used to snarf up to half of a DVD's capacity. That translates into at least 4-6 full-sized applications- and it does it fast. 200Mb in about a minute. USB based HDs are slower and tend to not hold as much. Keychain USB drives don't hold much more than 512Mb and usually are something on the order of 64-128Mb and are SLOW.
You need to go read the Scott McCloud links if you haven't- it's my opinion that he hits things squarely on the head of the nail for everything that RIAA and MPAA's member orgs crank out as well as e-books, etc.
They've not gotten there yet, to the best of my knowlege. It might be time, if your company's a major customer for that app of yours, to talk them into doing a Linux version of the application- they'll thank you for it because it'll run on anything Linux does.
They altered it so that the preferred mode is RF licensing on tech for W3C reccomendations- but left it open for the Working Groups to accept tech that is RAND or otherwise licensed and specified timelines for when they forfeit any right to inist upon the non-RF licensing. They dropped RAND from the discussion, but with the stated exception process, they all but said the term again. It's, of course, up to the working groups and there's defined timelines so there will be a much smaller likelyhood of a Rambus/JEDEC situation where they submarine a few patents on a real standard, so it's nowhere near as bad as things go. I don't really think they went far enough, to be honest, but it's much better than what they attempted to foist off on us previously.
Indeed. I read the current draft and found that while I had much, much less issues with the current incarnation than with previous ones, I saw many loopholes in the exception process. Frankly speaking (no pun intended), I don't think some of the exceptions are really needed and leave it open for the hijinx that we saw coming with the first attempts- it's just a little harder to pull a fast one on the public at large with this proposal.
The thing is, if the RIAA members can't prove they own the copyrights in question, then RIAA can't be pursuing infringement proceedings because they do not represent the infringed parties. Since this is a civil case, you have to have the wronged parties or their representatives pursuing the case.
Furthermore, there's this issue of the digital distribution service they turned on just right after Napster was effectively shut down. The only way you can license right at the moment, is through them. While nobody can be sure of misuse of monopoly position right at the moment and they may not be guilty thereof, it can very likely get proven in a court of law sufficient to meet the criteria of misuse and thereby opening up the opportunity to hold proceedings to strip all their member organizations of their copyrights.
Depends on the artist. Some of them actually make money on the albums. It's usually the ones that own their own label or is associated with such a label- it's pretty much never the case with any of the main RIAA member labels though.
Actually, I do believe that they can sue for recompense at that point. (Of course, I'm not a lawyer...) It's my understanding that it doesn't matter that Napster is guilty of contributory infringement- if RIAA can't produce what Patel is asking for, the party that brought them to court over it isn't the one that has the right to do so.
Depending on whether RIAA knew that they didn't have the right to pursue this, RIAA could be guilty of barritry (The pursuit of a non-existant case- they didn't have a case, the individual artists did. That won't go well for them...) or at the minimum, misuse of process since they used the courts to shut Napster down (without negotiation for some sort of deal) only to have the labels open their own service up at the same time they opened up a similar service that was solely under the control of the self-same labels. Both violations can incur the right for seeking damages on the party so affected- Napster may well be able to sue for damages.
If you're shrewd enough, you can get them to release their ownership on selected projects that might overlap with your own. I got 10 of my projects specifically stated in my NDA/NC agreement that deny my current employer any claims on the work done, even if it's overlapping with stuff they're doing. Since they're all open source projects (or they're going to be...) they had little issues with allowing me those consessions in IP ownership.
Glad to hear you love your job. I love mine too. I live computing (this is not to say that I don't have a life outside of computers- I do, but it never quite goes away from my thoughts...) and I've been in the industry 12 years now- getting paid to play for all intents and purposes. It's been a blast and the money's been really good too.
As someone pointed out, your first thought was of money, which is all well and good- but money is a fleeting thing at best. Realize that if the rest of your peers are scrounging for work, there's going to be less of that which you seem to consider the most important thing about for them to pay you with. You think your job is secure, but I can tell you right now that if Gates or Ballmer thought you were costing too much on their bottom line, they'd spend no more than a heartbeat's worth of time before ejecting you. Only in a startup where you are one of the principles are you even remotely close to being indespensible- and the past has shown even that security to be fleeting at best. Also, I'd have to beg to differ about Microsoft being the "World's greatest software manufacturer"- they are only one of the more successful ones. Culture is another important metric and I don't think that it's a good thing to be working for a company that lies, cheats, steals, and kills small companies for sport- and that IS in the Microsoft culture, through and through.
Do not confuse financial success with greatness- it's only ONE of the many metrics for the concept in question.
Unfortunately, it's no different in most other career paths- unlike what you claim. The same types can be found in amongst EE's, ME's, etc. The same two types can be found in documentation departments, graphic arts departments, etc. though usually you see the type 2's predominately in those.
All in all, there's so few people that DO try to bridge that gap. I was going to finish my MS in Comp Sci (and I still will) but now I plan on getting an MBA first- I've seen far, far too many clueless managers out there (both types) and I don't plan on eventually becoming a Type 2 manager without the other needed skills.
I honestly think they are both quite suitable chips.
You can integrate the core with other designs- it's just that nobody's doing it right now because they don't want to pay the licensing to IBM or Motorola (depending on which core they use...). Everybody's able to license MIPS cores and architechture designs because MIPS is a fabless design house and that is how they make their money.
It's faster than a corresponding MIPS (not to say that MIPS is slow or it's bad, mind...)- for a console, I'd like as much headroom as is reasonable so it can do incredible, knock my socks off type gaming.
Now, having said this, the ATI SOC is an interesting beastie- Radeon and MIPS on one chip. The only drawbacks I see with that design is that it's MIPS based so there is no chances whatsoever of finding already built stuff from third party providers. You're going to have to arrange all kinds of deals to make that really go. I'm trying to wrangle a engineering sample for my company right now to see what we can do with it, though- I'm not going to overlook a seriously fast, but way low-power solution for our product offerings.
In the past, 3DfX produced arcade chips (in fact, that was their business before they got into the PC gaming business...) and it could just as easily happen again. There will always be someone out there looking for that extra drop of speed or flash on their machines- and will plunk down cash for it.
Off the shelf components aren't what killed Sega all those years. It was being second to market with most of the stuff and mis-handling the marketing. Semi-proprietary actually ends up being more costly for the manufacturer in the long run because they're the ONLY customer for the device and usually they have only a couple of suppliers.
Sony largely used off-the shelf components where it counts in both the PSX and PS2. Microsoft's doing the same thing with the X-Box (Even moreso, the controllers are nothing more than USB controllers with special IDs to make them X-Box controllers. Nothing fancy needed in the electronics there that isn't already done.)
It's the way many of the game development companies are developing their games- targeting to the GBA itself and using a Visoly flash cartrige. Cheaper than Nintendo's answer and attainable for garage game and demo developers.
But the question remains, does attaching this higher performing antenna end up exceeding the effective radiated power beyond the limits set by regulations? If it does, you've got problems. The soup can doesn't and gets passable gain improvements over a bare card with a diversity antenna.
In this case, I doubt it's a hoax. The soup cans comprise a waveguide/feedhorn at the frequencies that the 802.11 cards operate at. Certain cans (such as old Hi-C cans) are fairly good feedhorns because they're shaped right and are the right length to get a good signal in them. I know, HBO used to use 2GHz beamed signals to households (Before cable was prevalent- it was more economical than satellite, etc.) and there was plans, etc. out at that time to snag the signals they were sending out so that you didn't have to pay the monthly service fee for the rig they were using to broadcast it. The varying plans for these recievers usually included an antenna design using a certain sized Folger's or Hi-C can for a feed horn and a metal dish sled for the parabolic reflector. Worked pretty good as a makeshift 2GHz antenna. I'm sure the feedhorn part would make for a decent unidirectional range booster for an 802.11 card with an antenna jack.
You can make code that screams on a PentiumI/II/III/IV (While not at "peak" performance, awfully close to it) that also runs completely well and at peak performance for a 386. In fact, it's my understanding that the later versions of Red Hat do this. It's all in the instruction sets chosen and the optimizations taken. Some things in the Pentium instruction set will boost performance over a 386 instruction set choice- but only if you're relying on combined writes to help out or doing vector operations. The combined writes might buy you something with large memory to memory copies, but small ones matter little how you do them. Most servers handle relatively small copies in general. If you're doing a WWW server, as long as it's 386 instructions with Pentium improving optimizations, you're ahead of the game. Same goes for most app servers. It's when you're managing large chunks of data (some database applications, graphics operations, etc.) that it becomes something of an issue.
They attribute a noxious combination of drug sales, gangs, and access to illegal firearms (Which were already so (It's been illegal as long as I can remember for a minor (under 21) to own a handgun save via inheritance, and even then they can't use it without adult supervision until that age...) before any new legislation- keep that in mind folks...)- it isn't what they're pegging as the problem.
Just like most clueless politicians- go for the quick, easy, unrelated fix that won't do a damn thing for the real problems.
They're a company making one of the more awesome theatre systems in existence. Also, arguably, the most expensive. The reason why IMax theatres are doing well is because most of them are museums of one sort or another or they are ran by private interests running them, not chains. (Cinemark is one notable exception, setting up at least several IMax theatres.)
It's far, far worse than you think. I currently write device drivers and systems level code for a living. Right now, I'm having to deal with an employer that's struggling to make payroll (Been dealing with that for 8 months now) and trying to find a job in this stupid market. Few prospects in the Dallas area- and the ones I've sent off resumes to have returned dead silence.
Depends. Some non-electronic things have some nice, nasty conductive runs of metal on them.
You don't want to microwave things like candles (there is a zinc wire in the wick of many of them these days for ensuring the wick stays upright throughout the life of the candle...) or gilt-edged china, etc.
Microwaving might work, but the best, most effective way of dealing with the RFID stuff is to take the tags off of the item. All other methods have some drawbacks- some more severe than others.
Slashdot Mirror
They're still going to be held liable for their past actions. If I commit a major robbery in the US and flee to Mexico, if they catch me, they will extradite me, if I set foot back in the country before the statute of limitations expires the potential for penalty for the crime, they'll arrest me all the same.
If they move it to India or elsewhere, unless they honor the terms laid down by the government for their infractions, etc. their products will be banned from import into the US.
This thing can be used to snarf up to half of a DVD's capacity. That translates into at least 4-6 full-sized applications- and it does it fast. 200Mb in about a minute. USB based HDs are slower and tend to not hold as much. Keychain USB drives don't hold much more than 512Mb and usually are something on the order of 64-128Mb and are SLOW.
That was in conflict with their interests to broker power and get paid money they probably ought not to have been.
You need to go read the Scott McCloud links if you haven't- it's my opinion that he hits things squarely on the head of the nail for everything that RIAA and MPAA's member orgs crank out as well as e-books, etc.
They've not gotten there yet, to the best of my knowlege. It might be time, if your company's a major customer for that app of yours, to talk them into doing a Linux version of the application- they'll thank you for it because it'll run on anything Linux does.
They altered it so that the preferred mode is RF licensing on tech for W3C reccomendations- but left it open for the Working Groups to accept tech that is RAND or otherwise licensed and specified timelines for when they forfeit any right to inist upon the non-RF licensing. They dropped RAND from the discussion, but with the stated exception process, they all but said the term again. It's, of course, up to the working groups and there's defined timelines so there will be a much smaller likelyhood of a Rambus/JEDEC situation where they submarine a few patents on a real standard, so it's nowhere near as bad as things go. I don't really think they went far enough, to be honest, but it's much better than what they attempted to foist off on us previously.
Indeed. I read the current draft and found that while I had much, much less issues with the current incarnation than with previous ones, I saw many loopholes in the exception process. Frankly speaking (no pun intended), I don't think some of the exceptions are really needed and leave it open for the hijinx that we saw coming with the first attempts- it's just a little harder to pull a fast one on the public at large with this proposal.
The thing is, if the RIAA members can't prove they own the copyrights in question, then RIAA can't be pursuing infringement proceedings because they do not represent the infringed parties. Since this is a civil case, you have to have the wronged parties or their representatives pursuing the case.
Furthermore, there's this issue of the digital distribution service they turned on just right after Napster was effectively shut down. The only way you can license right at the moment, is through them. While nobody can be sure of misuse of monopoly position right at the moment and they may not be guilty thereof, it can very likely get proven in a court of law sufficient to meet the criteria of misuse and thereby opening up the opportunity to hold proceedings to strip all their member organizations of their copyrights.
Depends on the artist. Some of them actually make money on the albums. It's usually the ones that own their own label or is associated with such a label- it's pretty much never the case with any of the main RIAA member labels though.
Actually, I do believe that they can sue for recompense at that point. (Of course, I'm not a lawyer...) It's my understanding that it doesn't matter that Napster is guilty of contributory infringement- if RIAA can't produce what Patel is asking for, the party that brought them to court over it isn't the one that has the right to do so.
Depending on whether RIAA knew that they didn't have the right to pursue this, RIAA could be guilty of barritry (The pursuit of a non-existant case- they didn't have a case, the individual artists did. That won't go well for them...) or at the minimum, misuse of process since they used the courts to shut Napster down (without negotiation for some sort of deal) only to have the labels open their own service up at the same time they opened up a similar service that was solely under the control of the self-same labels. Both violations can incur the right for seeking damages on the party so affected- Napster may well be able to sue for damages.
If you're shrewd enough, you can get them to release their ownership on selected projects that might overlap with your own. I got 10 of my projects specifically stated in my NDA/NC agreement that deny my current employer any claims on the work done, even if it's overlapping with stuff they're doing. Since they're all open source projects (or they're going to be...) they had little issues with allowing me those consessions in IP ownership.
Glad to hear you love your job. I love mine too. I live computing (this is not to say that I don't have a life outside of computers- I do, but it never quite goes away from my thoughts...) and I've been in the industry 12 years now- getting paid to play for all intents and purposes. It's been a blast and the money's been really good too.
As someone pointed out, your first thought was of money, which is all well and good- but money is a fleeting thing at best. Realize that if the rest of your peers are scrounging for work, there's going to be less of that which you seem to consider the most important thing about for them to pay you with. You think your job is secure, but I can tell you right now that if Gates or Ballmer thought you were costing too much on their bottom line, they'd spend no more than a heartbeat's worth of time before ejecting you. Only in a startup where you are one of the principles are you even remotely close to being indespensible- and the past has shown even that security to be fleeting at best.
Also, I'd have to beg to differ about Microsoft being the "World's greatest software manufacturer"- they are only one of the more successful ones. Culture is another important metric and I don't think that it's a good thing to be working for a company that lies, cheats, steals, and kills small companies for sport- and that IS in the Microsoft culture, through and through.
Do not confuse financial success with greatness- it's only ONE of the many metrics for the concept in question.
Unfortunately, it's no different in most other career paths- unlike what you claim. The same types can be found in amongst EE's, ME's, etc. The same two types can be found in documentation departments, graphic arts departments, etc. though usually you see the type 2's predominately in those.
All in all, there's so few people that DO try to bridge that gap. I was going to finish my MS in Comp Sci (and I still will) but now I plan on getting an MBA first- I've seen far, far too many clueless managers out there (both types) and I don't plan on eventually becoming a Type 2 manager without the other needed skills.
PPC's are pants? Really, now...
I honestly think they are both quite suitable chips.
You can integrate the core with other designs- it's just that nobody's doing it right now because they don't want to pay the licensing to IBM or Motorola (depending on which core they use...). Everybody's able to license MIPS cores and architechture designs because MIPS is a fabless design house and that is how they make their money.
It's faster than a corresponding MIPS (not to say that MIPS is slow or it's bad, mind...)- for a console, I'd like as much headroom as is reasonable so it can do incredible, knock my socks off type gaming.
Now, having said this, the ATI SOC is an interesting beastie- Radeon and MIPS on one chip. The only drawbacks I see with that design is that it's MIPS based so there is no chances whatsoever of finding already built stuff from third party providers. You're going to have to arrange all kinds of deals to make that really go. I'm trying to wrangle a engineering sample for my company right now to see what we can do with it, though- I'm not going to overlook a seriously fast, but way low-power solution for our product offerings.
In the past, 3DfX produced arcade chips (in fact, that was their business before they got into the PC gaming business...) and it could just as easily happen again. There will always be someone out there looking for that extra drop of speed or flash on their machines- and will plunk down cash for it.
Off the shelf components aren't what killed Sega all those years. It was being second to market with most of the stuff and mis-handling the marketing. Semi-proprietary actually ends up being more costly for the manufacturer in the long run because they're the ONLY customer for the device and usually they have only a couple of suppliers.
Sony largely used off-the shelf components where it counts in both the PSX and PS2. Microsoft's doing the same thing with the X-Box (Even moreso, the controllers are nothing more than USB controllers with special IDs to make them X-Box controllers. Nothing fancy needed in the electronics there that isn't already done.)
It's the way many of the game development companies are developing their games- targeting to the GBA itself and using a Visoly flash cartrige. Cheaper than Nintendo's answer and attainable for garage game and demo developers.
But the question remains, does attaching this higher performing antenna end up exceeding the effective radiated power beyond the limits set by regulations? If it does, you've got problems. The soup can doesn't and gets passable gain improvements over a bare card with a diversity antenna.
In this case, I doubt it's a hoax. The soup cans comprise a waveguide/feedhorn at the frequencies that the 802.11 cards operate at. Certain cans (such as old Hi-C cans) are fairly good feedhorns because they're shaped right and are the right length to get a good signal in them. I know, HBO used to use 2GHz beamed signals to households (Before cable was prevalent- it was more economical than satellite, etc.) and there was plans, etc. out at that time to snag the signals they were sending out so that you didn't have to pay the monthly service fee for the rig they were using to broadcast it. The varying plans for these recievers usually included an antenna design using a certain sized Folger's or Hi-C can for a feed horn and a metal dish sled for the parabolic reflector. Worked pretty good as a makeshift 2GHz antenna. I'm sure the feedhorn part would make for a decent unidirectional range booster for an 802.11 card with an antenna jack.
You can make code that screams on a PentiumI/II/III/IV (While not at "peak" performance, awfully close to it) that also runs completely well and at peak performance for a 386. In fact, it's my understanding that the later versions of Red Hat do this. It's all in the instruction sets chosen and the optimizations taken. Some things in the Pentium instruction set will boost performance over a 386 instruction set choice- but only if you're relying on combined writes to help out or doing vector operations. The combined writes might buy you something with large memory to memory copies, but small ones matter little how you do them. Most servers handle relatively small copies in general. If you're doing a WWW server, as long as it's 386 instructions with Pentium improving optimizations, you're ahead of the game. Same goes for most app servers. It's when you're managing large chunks of data (some database applications, graphics operations, etc.) that it becomes something of an issue.
It does not really mention videogames much.
They attribute a noxious combination of drug sales, gangs, and access to illegal firearms (Which were already so (It's been illegal as long as I can remember for a minor (under 21) to own a handgun save via inheritance, and even then they can't use it without adult supervision until that age...) before any new legislation- keep that in mind folks...)- it isn't what they're pegging as the problem.
Just like most clueless politicians- go for the quick, easy, unrelated fix that won't do a damn thing for the real problems.
They're a company making one of the more awesome theatre systems in existence. Also, arguably, the most expensive. The reason why IMax theatres are doing well is because most of them are museums of one sort or another or they are ran by private interests running them, not chains. (Cinemark is one notable exception, setting up at least several IMax theatres.)
It's far, far worse than you think. I currently write device drivers and systems level code for a living. Right now, I'm having to deal with an employer that's struggling to make payroll (Been dealing with that for 8 months now) and trying to find a job in this stupid market. Few prospects in the Dallas area- and the ones I've sent off resumes to have returned dead silence.
They're just slightly more pricey- something on the order of $.10 or so per tag chip/antenna...
Depends. Some non-electronic things have some nice, nasty conductive runs of metal on them.
You don't want to microwave things like candles (there is a zinc wire in the wick of many of them these days for ensuring the wick stays upright throughout the life of the candle...) or gilt-edged china, etc.
Microwaving might work, but the best, most effective way of dealing with the RFID stuff is to take the tags off of the item. All other methods have some drawbacks- some more severe than others.