Curious that inaccurate remarks are getting modded up as "Insightful" thesedays.
NTP has "WON" the suit, in that the court has ruled that RIM did in fact infringe on the patents. Now the court needs to decide what NTP gets for it. So far, the court has awarded (as a preliminary step while ligitation continues) NTP over 8% of RIM's sales, but NTP is not happy enough with that. RIM and NTP have not been able to come to an agreement on licensing, royalties, whatever, so the court now has to decide whether or not to enforce NTP's request for an injunction which will stop sales and service of the infringing devices. Both sides are calling the other's bluff. NTP hopes that if the injunction goes through, RIM will buckle and pay up hefty royalties rather than fizzle and die. RIM says it has a non-infringing software update ready to deploy if an injunction happens. RIM (and the world) also knows it will eventually win, because the USPTO has already issued preliminary rejection of ALL patents claims concerning the case, and now, a final rejection of some (2 of 9 claims IIRC). But until they are all final rejections, RIM is still infringing and therefore in a precarious legal position (subject to injunctions, for instance). NTP wants to cash in; RIM just wants to continue conducting business (i.e. earning money rather than litigating as a source of income, ala NTP, RAMBUS, SCO,...) without the handicap of obscene royalties for baseless patents.
The Google maps images of my neighborhood are very new... less than 1 year old. I know this to be true because there is a lot of house contruction going on here, and we just got our lawn (sod) last spring. It shows up in Google maps though. MSN, OTOH, has absolutely no satellite images of the area, new or old.
I would propose a 1-week Quarantine, where any computer found spreading a virus is removed from the network to allow the owner to clean it, and more importantly, to have a time out to think about the consequences to his peers of his lack of responsiblity.
Sure people will bitch and complain when it happens to them, but that's how you know that it's an effective deterent. To be a deterent, a punishment has to be unpleasant, and the people have to know that it will be enforced consistently. When a person learns that everytime his computer gets infected with a self-spreading virus, he goes without e-mail, chat room, and divx downloads for a week, things will change.
Make sure to loudly announce this change in policy beforehand. Suggest good anti-virus and firewall software, preferably free and/or site-licensed to remove any genuine impediment to people installing and using it. This may be a bit of a nightmare to enforce the first time, with say half your network infected. But the second time around, you will have fewer affected machines. And even fewer the third time.
Did you ever notice how "evil" countries/leaders often publicly claim to be not evil, just like the Google guys. Yet secretely, they vie for world domination. What if Google only claims to be not evil, but really they are trying to control the world's access to information in some sort of evil plot for world domination? How do we know that these satellite images are accurate and unretouched? What if they edit them to make certain cities or areas more or less attractive, like where they are buying/selling real estate for profit? I mean, soon you'll be able to see the conditions under which anyone else in the world lives... or at least you can see it as Google wants to present it, where it wants to present it.
I'm taking off the hat now. It doean't fit me well.
I do think it's cool how I can see a satellite image of my home, complete with my car in the driveway and patio furniture in the back yard. Cool and kind of scary.
"That trial was a sensational double rape-murder, i.e. was interesting enough to defy the publication ban."
"interesting enough"?! So, people were interested, and that means big sales of newpapers and magazines and big viewerships of TV programs. That means big profits. So I guess you are saying that if there is a big profit to be made, then to hell with the rights of the accused (or of the victims), publish in defiance of the publication ban. Sounds to me like a very American way of thinking.
A laptop user who plugs in his laptop for one hour, consuming 50 W of electricity (pretty high for a laptop actually), will use 0.05 kWh (kilo-Watt-hours). One kWh costs about 8 cents, so he uses less than 1/2 a cent of electricity during the hour.
Canada has had Sony Stores for many years, usually located in Malls. The sales staff are always well-dressed (shirt and tie mandatory, jacket optional), generally well-informed (with exceptions as always), and generally helpful. The prices are all MSRP of course, but at the Sony Store, every price is negotiable. They work on commission, and that can sometimes work to your advantage, as long as you can hold your own against them. I managed to purchase my latest receiver there for almost 25% off the list price! I have found that haggling at the Sony Store is generally easier and more successful than at other stores.
"Unsupported Claim"? I used dicrete codes with my remote every single day. One button turns on my TV and Receiver (if they aren't on already), and switches their inputs to the appropriate corresponding to the button I just pushed (using another set of discrete codes not used by the OEM remotes). Another button turns the system off. Pushing the off button doesn't toggle anything on and off. The codes are discrete. How's that for an usupported claim?
You obviously have no idea what you are talking about. Virtually all TVs (and other popular devices like VCRs, DVD players, etc.) have discrete on/off codes. The original remote sure doesn't have the corresponding buttons, but that does not prevent the device from responding to the code if it receives it. The only device that I own that doesn't have the capability to use discrete on/off is my Panasonic VCR.
DRM is a slap on the wrist
on
TMBG on DRM
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
DRM's only accomplishment is to make the record companies treat honest consumers (the people who have actually paid for the stuff) like criminals.
If I pay to download a track, or pop my new CD into my CD-ROM, it comes complete with DRM. I can't play it on my other PC. Forget about playing it on my Mac at all. Can I transfer it to my NetMD portable? Good luck! No, I can only play it on my stupid computer on my crappy speakers. Not on my portable, not on my stereo. However if I just don't bother to pay for it, and download the track/album in mp3 format from any number of questionable sources, I can play it on whatever device I want. In other words, if I pay for it, the Label treats me like a criminal and restricts my ability to use what I paid for. Steal it, and I can do what I want.
This would make it easy to catch speeders, using a pair of readers embedded in the road some distance apart. Based on the amount of time it takes your vehicle to travel from the first reader to the second (say 1 km away), your speed is caculated. Your (car's) identity is known by the RFID itself, so your ticket comes in the mail. It would be a lot more accurate than photo radar (no, "it must have been the other guy speeding not me" excuses) and with a lot less maintenace too (no film, no lenses to clean).
They say that they assume each song uploaded is downloaded 10 times, which makes the total monetary loss $2500, i.e. a felony. How does 10 * $1 per song (the going rate at online distros like iTunes) equal $2500? Looks like $10 to me.
The fact is, there is no legitimate reason to need to change the IMEI number. This is a serial number, and it uniquely identifies each phone. Changing it is just the same as changing the VIN of a car. You can buy a used phone from someone else and activate that phone; this is actually easier than buying a used car and licensing it.
The comment "What next - a bill to disallow modifying your PC?", is clearly an attempt by the submitter to rouse emotions in people; to make them feel that they are being violated in some way by this bill. The bill is legit.
Maybe it's because the film industry adds geniune value to their DVD's, thus enticing consumers to buy them. The music industry is just adding to the price of CD's, without adding value.
If CD's cost as much here (in Canada) as they do in the US, I probably wouldn't buy many at all. But since I can buy them here at about CDN$15 a pop (that's about US $10), I buy maybe 4 or 5 a month.
It's all simple economics - higher prices mean lower demand. The record industry isn't stupid; they know that. They have used it to their advantage recently, by increasing prices to *decrease* sales quite intentionally. That way, they can argue, "Look! sales are down. It's those pirates and their MP3's. We need legislation... boo hoo, whine whine".
I wonder if their new Parhelia can deliver on its promises? Have Matrox's openGL drivers improved significantly over the past few years? Poor openGL was what killed G200's promising future, and I would hate to see a repeat performance.
Virtually no ISP in the land will allow you to sell your excess bandwidth. Many will shut you down if they even suspect that you may be using a NAT device to connect multiple machines.
If you just want to play "old games" then you can do so quite nicely using Virtual PC on the Macintosh. Most high-selling games since the time of QuakeIII are available on the Mac.
But you would have to build it yourself. Don't get me wrong... I personally would never buy a PC that I did not build myself (Macs excluded of course).
If you want to have a complete system in a box with a warranty and a dealer that will take care of you and toll-free tech support, and all the other bonuses, you pay as much for an "equivalent" PC as you do for the Mac. Of course, one could argue that no PC could equal the Mac, if only for the reason that it doesn't run Mac OS X, but that is a debate for a different forum.
Sorry to say, but selling OS lisences is not profittable. MS does not make it's money from its consumer OS's. They make it from Office and server/enterprise software.
Profit is in my opinion the main reason that Apple decided not to put Mac OS X onto intel hardware. (Note that the developer preview versions of it did run on Intel hardware, and a significant amount of the development was done on Intel!).
Slashdot Mirror
Curious that inaccurate remarks are getting modded up as "Insightful" thesedays.
...) without the handicap of obscene royalties for baseless patents.
NTP has "WON" the suit, in that the court has ruled that RIM did in fact infringe on the patents. Now the court needs to decide what NTP gets for it. So far, the court has awarded (as a preliminary step while ligitation continues) NTP over 8% of RIM's sales, but NTP is not happy enough with that. RIM and NTP have not been able to come to an agreement on licensing, royalties, whatever, so the court now has to decide whether or not to enforce NTP's request for an injunction which will stop sales and service of the infringing devices. Both sides are calling the other's bluff. NTP hopes that if the injunction goes through, RIM will buckle and pay up hefty royalties rather than fizzle and die. RIM says it has a non-infringing software update ready to deploy if an injunction happens. RIM (and the world) also knows it will eventually win, because the USPTO has already issued preliminary rejection of ALL patents claims concerning the case, and now, a final rejection of some (2 of 9 claims IIRC). But until they are all final rejections, RIM is still infringing and therefore in a precarious legal position (subject to injunctions, for instance). NTP wants to cash in; RIM just wants to continue conducting business (i.e. earning money rather than litigating as a source of income, ala NTP, RAMBUS, SCO,
Apple's switch to Intel didn't kill Apple's open source efforts...
People using Apple's open-source efforts to pirate Mac OS X killed Apple's open-source efforts.
The Google maps images of my neighborhood are very new... less than 1 year old. I know this to be true because there is a lot of house contruction going on here, and we just got our lawn (sod) last spring. It shows up in Google maps though. MSN, OTOH, has absolutely no satellite images of the area, new or old.
I would propose a 1-week Quarantine, where any computer found spreading a virus is removed from the network to allow the owner to clean it, and more importantly, to have a time out to think about the consequences to his peers of his lack of responsiblity.
Sure people will bitch and complain when it happens to them, but that's how you know that it's an effective deterent. To be a deterent, a punishment has to be unpleasant, and the people have to know that it will be enforced consistently. When a person learns that everytime his computer gets infected with a self-spreading virus, he goes without e-mail, chat room, and divx downloads for a week, things will change.
Make sure to loudly announce this change in policy beforehand. Suggest good anti-virus and firewall software, preferably free and/or site-licensed to remove any genuine impediment to people installing and using it. This may be a bit of a nightmare to enforce the first time, with say half your network infected. But the second time around, you will have fewer affected machines. And even fewer the third time.
Allow me to wear my Devil's Advocate hat for a moment...
Did you ever notice how "evil" countries/leaders often publicly claim to be not evil, just like the Google guys. Yet secretely, they vie for world domination. What if Google only claims to be not evil, but really they are trying to control the world's access to information in some sort of evil plot for world domination? How do we know that these satellite images are accurate and unretouched? What if they edit them to make certain cities or areas more or less attractive, like where they are buying/selling real estate for profit? I mean, soon you'll be able to see the conditions under which anyone else in the world lives... or at least you can see it as Google wants to present it, where it wants to present it.
I'm taking off the hat now. It doean't fit me well.
I do think it's cool how I can see a satellite image of my home, complete with my car in the driveway and patio furniture in the back yard. Cool and kind of scary.
"That trial was a sensational double rape-murder, i.e. was interesting enough to defy the publication ban."
"interesting enough"?! So, people were interested, and that means big sales of newpapers and magazines and big viewerships of TV programs. That means big profits. So I guess you are saying that if there is a big profit to be made, then to hell with the rights of the accused (or of the victims), publish in defiance of the publication ban. Sounds to me like a very American way of thinking.
It's my understanding that state sales taxes are explicitly exempt (in most states) from mail-order. The same is true for most provinces in Canada.
A laptop user who plugs in his laptop for one hour, consuming 50 W of electricity (pretty high for a laptop actually), will use 0.05 kWh (kilo-Watt-hours). One kWh costs about 8 cents, so he uses less than 1/2 a cent of electricity during the hour.
Canada has had Sony Stores for many years, usually located in Malls. The sales staff are always well-dressed (shirt and tie mandatory, jacket optional), generally well-informed (with exceptions as always), and generally helpful. The prices are all MSRP of course, but at the Sony Store, every price is negotiable. They work on commission, and that can sometimes work to your advantage, as long as you can hold your own against them. I managed to purchase my latest receiver there for almost 25% off the list price! I have found that haggling at the Sony Store is generally easier and more successful than at other stores.
"Unsupported Claim"?
I used dicrete codes with my remote every single day. One button turns on my TV and Receiver (if they aren't on already), and switches their inputs to the appropriate corresponding to the button I just pushed (using another set of discrete codes not used by the OEM remotes). Another button turns the system off. Pushing the off button doesn't toggle anything on and off. The codes are discrete. How's that for an usupported claim?
p.s. the TV is 6 months old.
Read Intel's website. LCOS was to be used for front or rear projection. No flat (i.e. thin) panels here.
You obviously have no idea what you are talking about. Virtually all TVs (and other popular devices like VCRs, DVD players, etc.) have discrete on/off codes. The original remote sure doesn't have the corresponding buttons, but that does not prevent the device from responding to the code if it receives it. The only device that I own that doesn't have the capability to use discrete on/off is my Panasonic VCR.
Has Dogbert taken to keeping pet cats?
DRM's only accomplishment is to make the record companies treat honest consumers (the people who have actually paid for the stuff) like criminals.
If I pay to download a track, or pop my new CD into my CD-ROM, it comes complete with DRM. I can't play it on my other PC. Forget about playing it on my Mac at all. Can I transfer it to my NetMD portable? Good luck! No, I can only play it on my stupid computer on my crappy speakers. Not on my portable, not on my stereo. However if I just don't bother to pay for it, and download the track/album in mp3 format from any number of questionable sources, I can play it on whatever device I want. In other words, if I pay for it, the Label treats me like a criminal and restricts my ability to use what I paid for. Steal it, and I can do what I want.
This would make it easy to catch speeders, using a pair of readers embedded in the road some distance apart. Based on the amount of time it takes your vehicle to travel from the first reader to the second (say 1 km away), your speed is caculated. Your (car's) identity is known by the RFID itself, so your ticket comes in the mail. It would be a lot more accurate than photo radar (no, "it must have been the other guy speeding not me" excuses) and with a lot less maintenace too (no film, no lenses to clean).
They say that they assume each song uploaded is downloaded 10 times, which makes the total monetary loss $2500, i.e. a felony. How does 10 * $1 per song (the going rate at online distros like iTunes) equal $2500? Looks like $10 to me.
As the subject says, an SPL of 40 dB is 1/316 of the loudness of an SPL of 65 dB.
(ratio as dB) = 10 * log(ratio)
25 = 10 * log r
2.5 = log r
10^2.5 = r
316 = r (the ratio)
The fact is, there is no legitimate reason to need to change the IMEI number. This is a serial number, and it uniquely identifies each phone. Changing it is just the same as changing the VIN of a car. You can buy a used phone from someone else and activate that phone; this is actually easier than buying a used car and licensing it.
The comment "What next - a bill to disallow modifying your PC?", is clearly an attempt by the submitter to rouse emotions in people; to make them feel that they are being violated in some way by this bill. The bill is legit.
Maybe it's because the film industry adds geniune value to their DVD's, thus enticing consumers to buy them. The music industry is just adding to the price of CD's, without adding value.
If CD's cost as much here (in Canada) as they do in the US, I probably wouldn't buy many at all. But since I can buy them here at about CDN$15 a pop (that's about US $10), I buy maybe 4 or 5 a month.
It's all simple economics - higher prices mean lower demand. The record industry isn't stupid; they know that. They have used it to their advantage recently, by increasing prices to *decrease* sales quite intentionally. That way, they can argue, "Look! sales are down. It's those pirates and their MP3's. We need legislation... boo hoo, whine whine".
I wonder if their new Parhelia can deliver on its promises? Have Matrox's openGL drivers improved significantly over the past few years? Poor openGL was what killed G200's promising future, and I would hate to see a repeat performance.
Having two discrete levels of 'depth' does not a three-dimensional image make.
Virtually no ISP in the land will allow you to sell your excess bandwidth. Many will shut you down if they even suspect that you may be using a NAT device to connect multiple machines.
If you just want to play "old games" then you can do so quite nicely using Virtual PC on the Macintosh. Most high-selling games since the time of QuakeIII are available on the Mac.
But you would have to build it yourself. Don't get me wrong... I personally would never buy a PC that I did not build myself (Macs excluded of course).
If you want to have a complete system in a box with a warranty and a dealer that will take care of you and toll-free tech support, and all the other bonuses, you pay as much for an "equivalent" PC as you do for the Mac. Of course, one could argue that no PC could equal the Mac, if only for the reason that it doesn't run Mac OS X, but that is a debate for a different forum.
Sorry to say, but selling OS lisences is not profittable. MS does not make it's money from its consumer OS's. They make it from Office and server/enterprise software.
Profit is in my opinion the main reason that Apple decided not to put Mac OS X onto intel hardware. (Note that the developer preview versions of it did run on Intel hardware, and a significant amount of the development was done on Intel!).