Hmmm, seems like one or two early posters seem to think that we will see these chips in desktop PCs (asking about USB, ATA, SCSI support, etc). But if you expect to find these ETRAX system-on-chip units in a desktop PC, then you'll be looking in the wrong place - because they'll be in embedded systems.
With 8MB SDRAM and 2MB Flash memory, these chips could be running your next souped-up GPS device, your next smart (landline) phone, your internet-savvy fridge, your second generation PVR, etc, etc.
As we move to a "chips in everything" society, lower power, highly integrated processors like this one will run countless devices. Today they may cost $50, tomorrow they will cost a fraction of that and will be just about everywhere.
I don't know what the average library is like in the US, but here in the UK, lending libraries are multimedia.
My local library lends books, audio CDs, videos, DVDs and even some (mainly educational) CD-ROMs. Books rentals are free, video rentals cost £1/$1.50 per week (compared to £3/$4.50 per night from Blockbuster), and the cost of the others varies.
But just because people are going to the library instead of the bookshop, authors don't loose out. Each time a book is lent, the author(s) receive royalties of around 5 pence/7.5 cents, capped (I think) at around £35,000/$52,500 per author per year.
For many authors whose books are out of print and/or not readily stocked by bookshops, these payments make a big difference. Not every writer is as sucessful as Stephen King or Nick Hornby, and this pay-per-rental method promotes less popular authors (allowing them the chance to become more popular) and promotes literary diversity.
This is the first feature-length movie from people who are more used to producing interactive rather than non-interactive entertainment. So it's not going to be up for Best Motion Picture at the Oscars. So what? What were you expecting?
Very few artists who jump over to a media unfamiliar to them hit a home run first time round. There's this thing called learning the ropes. Final Fantasy the movie always was going to be about eye candy first and storyline second, so it's not surprising that it looks good but isn't necessary engaging. I wonder if Katz is an anime/manga fan, because I bet that, as well as FF gamers, they were their (cinema-going) target audience.
Off the top of my head, I can't think of a single video/PC game-to-movie crossover that wasn't panned by the critics. Super Mario Bros, Double Dragon, Wing Commander, Lara Croft: Tomb Raider aren't exactly amongst the most critically acclaimed movies ever made, so why expect any more from FF?
This is, of course, complete rubbish. Psion handhelds have shipped with Psiwin and a link cable for many years now, at no extra cost.
Yeah, well I don't suppose you owned a Psion Siena that, as this 1998 PC Magazine (UK) review clearly states, shipped without any kind of connectivity.
OK, so by 1998 Psion did bundle very basic PC connectivity with some of its models (also reviewed were the Psion 3C and the Psion 5) but this wasn't always the case - the Psiwin software and link cable started life as an optional extra.
But isn't it disgraceful enough that, only three years ago, Psion were happy to sell a £200/$300 (the prices in the review are exclusive of taxes) handheld device without PC connectivity in the box? And that cost of PC connectivity was for this device was a bargain-basement £80/$120?
Is this what you meant by "no extra cost"?
Meanwhile, a PalmPilot Professional cost £220/£330 and the (at that time) new Palm III cost £300/$450. Arguably finer products with unparalled connectivity at no extra cost.
Next time, check your facts before you start commenting on the veracity of those provided by others.
For a long time, Psion had the handheld market sewn-up. Sure, it had competitors like Casio and Atari (remember the Portfolio anyone?) but no one who really had a well-rounded, well-supported product with either a software- or user-base to match.
But the one area the Psion was weak in was connectivity. Out of the box, you could not connect a Psion to a PC or a Mac, which meant all those names, numbers and address had to be entered manually. Eventually, the company released connectivity kits that allowed users to exchange data between their devices and their PCs. But at £50/$80 or so, these weren't exactly great value for money.
Then US Robotics came along with the Pilot, which, after various model revisions and name changes, became the Palm. Now, fuctionwise, this new handheld didn't do anything that any other handheld could do - to-do list, calendar, calculator, contacts, notes. But what it did do was connect to and exchange data with PCs very easily. At the touch of a button no less, out of the box
Meanwhile, Psion happily trundled on ignoring the fact that the market had changed and that users now expected PC connectivity at no extra cost. Rather than bundling the necessary cable and software (cost to them perhaps £10/$15), they carried on with the same business model.
Now when you have a monopoly (or near monopoly) you can ignore the market like this and just do what you want. When you don't, you have to watch the rest of the herd and, sometimes, follow them.
Psion didn't, sales dropped, the Symbian alliance lifeboat sank, and the rest is history.
Every Microsoft hardware product has been developed in order to help the company sell more software.
The original Microsoft mouse was launched to provide Windows 1.0 users with a compatible pointing device, the Natural Keyboard was launched with two custom keys specifically tailored to the simultaneously-launched Windows 95, and the SideWinder gamepads and joysticks were launched to help promote Windows gaming.
Microsoft does not make hardware for any other reason. If they believed that the next generation of their software would work better with a green coloured widget as a pointing device rather than a mouse, Microsoft would try to sell us green coloured widgets. Such is the nature of Microsoft's hardware focus.
As a kid, I wasn't fortunate to have either a Lego or Meccano set but I loved playing with both when I visited friends or relatives who did. Back then, in the pre-Mindstorms days, Lego was made up of very basic building blocks - far less complex than it is today with very few custom parts.
Looking back, they were essentially two completely different toys.
Meccano/Erector Set was an open-ended mechanical construction set that taught (by trial and error, intuition and inspiration) the basic concepts of mechanical engineering. Lego, on the other hand, was more about shapes (and colours) working together. Basically, it analogous to architectural design than to anything mechanical.
Meccano/Erector set constructs did something. Lego constructs just looked good.
Of course, this changed when Lego started to bring out its custom kits - engines, remote controls, etc essentially changed the nature of the game. But, more often than not, the kids who played with these by-the-numbers custom kits had little or no idea of the mechanical principles involved in making their latest creation go, whereas kids who messed around with Meccano/Erector Set were far more au fait with the science behind the scenes, even if they weren't conciously aware of their knowledge.
Bottom line: Meccano/Erector Set taught kids how to think mechanics far more than the Lego of that time ever did. It was a triumph of substance over style. However, Lego's increasing popularity and the dwindling attraction of Meccano/Erector Set had the inverse effect. Eventually, unfortunately, style did triumph over substance.
Jeez, why do people have such a bad grip of the English language? Is it really that hard to understand?
Yes, "two of". As in "not exclusively of". Yes, the Intel Pentium 4 is one of the most important chips out there. And yes, so is the AMD Athlon. But so it the Motorola G4, and so for that matter is the upcoming Intel Itanium.
Now if the description of the article said "the two most important", I could understand your gripe. But it doesn't. And besides, haven't we already seen dozens of similar comparisons between Intel and AMD processor families?
By definition, pop-up ads are invasive. They interupt the browsing experience and generate very negative reactions from users.
The first thing I do when I see one is close down the offending window - I very rarely even look at what is being shoved down my throat.
The pop-up ad is just a phase. Advertisers saw that traditional banner ads weren't working so the marketing people were asked to come up with something different. However, once the user feedback tricles up the chain (via complaints, usability studies, etc) they will be consigned to the bin by any ad agency worth it's salt.
Unfortunately, as one bad idea dies a death, another one springs to life. The sucessor to the pop-up will probably be just as annoying although, eventually, the ad industry will find some form of getting the message across that 99% of the browsing public can live with.
Just proves that old adage that people will tell their bookmaker what they won't tell their priest.
What it comes down to is this: as you are after the casinos money (and they, of course, are after yours), you are far more likely to respond truthfully to a invasive questionnaire from them than you are one from Amazon.com or anyone else.
The fact that they are more likely to check up on the information provided to them (to protect themselves financially and legally) means that they are less likely to get people lying through their teeth on their books.
Apple has always been an innovative system builder with a strong emphasis on design, playing at being Ferrari while the rest of the industry was happy playing at being Ford - the Mac Classic, the 20th Anniversary Mac, the iMac, even today's standard G4's all have design features that have critics and users alike begging for more.
Unfortunately, the Cube also had its share of faults. Its fanless silence, case design and touch sensitive on-off switch were all great but were all problematic - the units overheated often, cases became cracked and the switches sometimes failed. Apple buried its head in the sand over these for a while, but it was inevitable that the writing was on the wall for the Cube, not least of all because of all the negative press that these failures generated.
Will Apple stop being innovative in terms of case design? Not likely while Steve Jobs is still at the helm, and a good thing too. Without the influence of Jobs and Apple we'd probably all be stuck with a CLI. That's not to say that CLIs are a bad thing but Apple bought the GUI to the mass market, and the mass market appeal of an easy to use PC made PCs cheaper for all of us.
Once the "bill chip" becomes available, I propose to test how well it works.
If you all send me one new bill of every denomination I will spend them wisely for you at various locations. If you can track the cash, then obviously I'll have to try harder to go undetected with the next batch you send me to test. If you can't, then I've done my job.
I offer my services freely and expect no renumeration for my time, effort or bare cheek.
If you have 20 million of the damn things all sending a signal from a seafront warehouse in Miami, then our heroes will be saved the donkey work and can spend their time doing what matters - getting the girl.
Fair point, some of the patents handed out recently seem extremely frivolous to you, me and a million others. "One Click" shopping anyone?
But the point I was trying to make was that patents lapse after a certain amount of time (20? 30? years), after which the technology enters the public domain.
Example: Sony had a patent on the technology it uses to make its Trinitron screens. While it held that patent, it had reasonable opportunity to recover its R&D spend and profit from its invention. During that time it could license the technology as it saw fit or legally persue those that infringed on its patent. Once the patent had expired though it was open season, and companies such as Mitsubishi (with their Diamondtron displays) could use Sony's invention at no cost.
All this, of course, is no help to those companies being screwed by Amazon.com's "One Click Shopping" patent.
Basically, the patent system works pretty well past the point where a patent is awarded. If we could weed out those ridiculous claims, such as those where invention of a commonly used technology was being claimed (and by that I mean one that was already accepted as being in the public domain), then the system would work as it was intended.
Because the DMCA allows content providers to regulate access and use they can set all the terms of use. And much like the database protection proposal, the de facto duration of protection under the DMCA is potentially infinite. While copyright law in 2001 protects any work created today for life of the author plus 70 years or 95 years in the case of corporate "works for hire," electronic gates do not expire.
The recent 20 year extension to copyright pushed through by legislators under the Clinton administration was heavily backed by big business. Disney was about to lose copyright on Mickey Mouse and they could't allow that to happen at any cost. Many other large corporations had similar concerns.
DMCA is being pushed by the same players, for the same reasons. This time though, they want their "extensions" up front. Or, in other words, they don't want ever to have to let go.
Why copyright law can't be more like patent law I don't understand. Is the work of an author or an illustrator really that much different from that of a designer?
So now we can give people 100% fully independent artificial heart transplants, isn't it time we moved on to brains, courage and a portable instantaneous matter transportation device (aka magic red shoes) that will take you anywhere you want to go?
This from the only country in the first world where the level of medical treatment that you receive is determined by the size of your wallet.
Every other civilised society has recognised that free health care for all is a good thing. The US, for whatever reason, hasn't quite grasped the concept yet.
Or are you one of those "if they want a new kidney they can pay for it themselves" people?
When I'm sick, I don't head for the US, I just go to see my doctor down the road. The only thing he's interested in is my health, not my credit card number.
Correct me if I'm wrong here but Acme, as a car rental company are well within their rights to impose terms and conditions when they lease their property to another party.
These terms and conditions will include all the standard stuff - "you, the renter, are responsible for the vehicle, it's condition, the safety of the driver and passangers, etc."
Somewhere in there will be a section about properly adhering to the law - buckling up properly, not driving while intoxicated, not overloading the vehicle, not speeding, etc.
If they want to impose fines for certain types be behaviour, it's up to them as long as they properly inform the renter beforehand and as long as they don't improperly infringe on the renter's rights.
In other words, as long as they let you know up front what you can and can't do, the possible consequences of certain actions (eg, spoiling the upholstery or speeding), and they do so properly and fairly in the eyes of the law, then there's nothing wrong with what they are doing.
Of course, you as the renter have a choice. You can either accept their terms and conditions or you can walk down the road and take your business elsewhere.
Of course, if you are caught speeding you could always argue the point, especially if there are mitigating circumstances. Being late for work probably won't rub but driving your heavily pregnant wife to the hospital so that she doesn't give birth in the car would I guess.
Basically, the judgement in this case came down against Acme because the court felt that they had properly informed people that their actions were punishable until well after the fact. It would seem that if they had given proper notice then the court would not have taken issue so strongly.
This isn't the first time that CCTV and surveillance generally has been discussed on/. and it won't be the last.
The natural (knee-jerk?) reaction to this kind of story seems to be negative: I don't want someone, especially the government, watching me, etc, etc.
But all of those comparisons to 1984 and Enemy of the State are just so over the top. Big Brother definitely isn't watching you, and Jon Voight isn't either.
CCTVs in public places aren't placed there to infringe on the constitutional rights of you or anyone else. They can't do that because the Constitution doesn't protect your right to be invisible in a public place.
If your a known criminal or are engaging in criminal activity then a CCTV camera on the street corner isn't exactly welcome. But if your Joe Average it's no better or no worse than someone standing there taking in the view.
Watching everyone all of the time takes a lot of resources. The former East German government tried it back in the days of the Cold War. Eventually, it toppled under the strain that such a machine placed upon itself and, in turn, so did the Berlin Wall.
I seem to remember buying (and playing) Final Fantasy VII for Windows while my friend enjoyed the same experience on his PlayStation. FF VIII made it to the PC too, although FF IX didn't.
The PC conversion was little more than a port over and didn't make full use of the superior performance that graphics cards of the time made over the PS1. However, it did come with a clever little Yamaha software synth, which enhanced audio for gamers who didn't own a top-notch sound card - I'm not sure how that worked, all I know is that it did.
I am not saying that it can't be done, that Steve Bennett can't do it, that I can or that only a government can.
What I am saying is that the project, as I understand it to be, in its current form, is extremely unlikely to result in a safe launch and re-entry.
Unlike most people here, I can honestly say that I've done more than read the BBC story and browse a few related web sites. I've actually spoken to some of the players involved, as well as other prominent figures in the British amateur rocketry scene.
The concensus of opinions (theirs and mine) seems to be:
The project is little more than a concept right now.
The person heading the project doesn't have a very good record of successful launches.
Testing launch vehicles, especially manned ones, is a good thing.
Testing launch vehicles, especially manned ones, again and again is a very good thing.
Risking your life unnecessarily on the first launch of any space vehicle is a bad thing.
I, and 99.9 percent of the people out there want to see Steve succeed. However, we don't want to see him throw his life needlessly away. Hence the note of caution.
I've met Steve Bennett and I have to say he seems like a nice guy. I've also met some of the other people mentioned in the BBC News article and they know what they are talking about too.
I wish Steve all the luck in the world but, from what I've read and heard, he's setting himself up for a very big fall. At best, his rocket won't get off the ground (and perhaps not even off the drawing board). At worst, he's going to end up as a human firework.
Test, test, test is the mantra of every respectable physicist, especially so in the fields of aero- and astronautics. Anyone who would put his life on the line in an initial test flight of this nature has to be missing some of his marbles.
Slashdot Mirror
Hmmm, seems like one or two early posters seem to think that we will see these chips in desktop PCs (asking about USB, ATA, SCSI support, etc). But if you expect to find these ETRAX system-on-chip units in a desktop PC, then you'll be looking in the wrong place - because they'll be in embedded systems.
With 8MB SDRAM and 2MB Flash memory, these chips could be running your next souped-up GPS device, your next smart (landline) phone, your internet-savvy fridge, your second generation PVR, etc, etc.
As we move to a "chips in everything" society, lower power, highly integrated processors like this one will run countless devices. Today they may cost $50, tomorrow they will cost a fraction of that and will be just about everywhere.
I don't know what the average library is like in the US, but here in the UK, lending libraries are multimedia.
My local library lends books, audio CDs, videos, DVDs and even some (mainly educational) CD-ROMs. Books rentals are free, video rentals cost £1/$1.50 per week (compared to £3/$4.50 per night from Blockbuster), and the cost of the others varies.
But just because people are going to the library instead of the bookshop, authors don't loose out. Each time a book is lent, the author(s) receive royalties of around 5 pence/7.5 cents, capped (I think) at around £35,000/$52,500 per author per year.
For many authors whose books are out of print and/or not readily stocked by bookshops, these payments make a big difference. Not every writer is as sucessful as Stephen King or Nick Hornby, and this pay-per-rental method promotes less popular authors (allowing them the chance to become more popular) and promotes literary diversity.
This is the first feature-length movie from people who are more used to producing interactive rather than non-interactive entertainment. So it's not going to be up for Best Motion Picture at the Oscars. So what? What were you expecting?
Very few artists who jump over to a media unfamiliar to them hit a home run first time round. There's this thing called learning the ropes. Final Fantasy the movie always was going to be about eye candy first and storyline second, so it's not surprising that it looks good but isn't necessary engaging. I wonder if Katz is an anime/manga fan, because I bet that, as well as FF gamers, they were their (cinema-going) target audience.
Off the top of my head, I can't think of a single video/PC game-to-movie crossover that wasn't panned by the critics. Super Mario Bros, Double Dragon, Wing Commander, Lara Croft: Tomb Raider aren't exactly amongst the most critically acclaimed movies ever made, so why expect any more from FF?
Great. Now there are twice as many things that can go wrong.
At least it will put a temporary halt to "my hard drive is bigger than your hard drive" arguments.
Or should that be "my areal density is denser than your areal density"?
(Is it me or does areal density sound rude?)
This is, of course, complete rubbish. Psion handhelds have shipped with Psiwin and a link cable for many years now, at no extra cost.
Yeah, well I don't suppose you owned a Psion Siena that, as this 1998 PC Magazine (UK) review clearly states, shipped without any kind of connectivity.
OK, so by 1998 Psion did bundle very basic PC connectivity with some of its models (also reviewed were the Psion 3C and the Psion 5) but this wasn't always the case - the Psiwin software and link cable started life as an optional extra.
But isn't it disgraceful enough that, only three years ago, Psion were happy to sell a £200/$300 (the prices in the review are exclusive of taxes) handheld device without PC connectivity in the box? And that cost of PC connectivity was for this device was a bargain-basement £80/$120?
Is this what you meant by "no extra cost"?
Meanwhile, a PalmPilot Professional cost £220/£330 and the (at that time) new Palm III cost £300/$450. Arguably finer products with unparalled connectivity at no extra cost.Next time, check your facts before you start commenting on the veracity of those provided by others.
For a long time, Psion had the handheld market sewn-up. Sure, it had competitors like Casio and Atari (remember the Portfolio anyone?) but no one who really had a well-rounded, well-supported product with either a software- or user-base to match.
But the one area the Psion was weak in was connectivity. Out of the box, you could not connect a Psion to a PC or a Mac, which meant all those names, numbers and address had to be entered manually. Eventually, the company released connectivity kits that allowed users to exchange data between their devices and their PCs. But at £50/$80 or so, these weren't exactly great value for money.
Then US Robotics came along with the Pilot, which, after various model revisions and name changes, became the Palm. Now, fuctionwise, this new handheld didn't do anything that any other handheld could do - to-do list, calendar, calculator, contacts, notes. But what it did do was connect to and exchange data with PCs very easily. At the touch of a button no less, out of the box
Meanwhile, Psion happily trundled on ignoring the fact that the market had changed and that users now expected PC connectivity at no extra cost. Rather than bundling the necessary cable and software (cost to them perhaps £10/$15), they carried on with the same business model.
Now when you have a monopoly (or near monopoly) you can ignore the market like this and just do what you want. When you don't, you have to watch the rest of the herd and, sometimes, follow them.
Psion didn't, sales dropped, the Symbian alliance lifeboat sank, and the rest is history.
Every Microsoft hardware product has been developed in order to help the company sell more software.
The original Microsoft mouse was launched to provide Windows 1.0 users with a compatible pointing device, the Natural Keyboard was launched with two custom keys specifically tailored to the simultaneously-launched Windows 95, and the SideWinder gamepads and joysticks were launched to help promote Windows gaming.
Microsoft does not make hardware for any other reason. If they believed that the next generation of their software would work better with a green coloured widget as a pointing device rather than a mouse, Microsoft would try to sell us green coloured widgets. Such is the nature of Microsoft's hardware focus.
As a kid, I wasn't fortunate to have either a Lego or Meccano set but I loved playing with both when I visited friends or relatives who did. Back then, in the pre-Mindstorms days, Lego was made up of very basic building blocks - far less complex than it is today with very few custom parts.
Looking back, they were essentially two completely different toys.
Meccano/Erector Set was an open-ended mechanical construction set that taught (by trial and error, intuition and inspiration) the basic concepts of mechanical engineering. Lego, on the other hand, was more about shapes (and colours) working together. Basically, it analogous to architectural design than to anything mechanical.
Meccano/Erector set constructs did something. Lego constructs just looked good.Of course, this changed when Lego started to bring out its custom kits - engines, remote controls, etc essentially changed the nature of the game. But, more often than not, the kids who played with these by-the-numbers custom kits had little or no idea of the mechanical principles involved in making their latest creation go, whereas kids who messed around with Meccano/Erector Set were far more au fait with the science behind the scenes, even if they weren't conciously aware of their knowledge.
Bottom line: Meccano/Erector Set taught kids how to think mechanics far more than the Lego of that time ever did. It was a triumph of substance over style. However, Lego's increasing popularity and the dwindling attraction of Meccano/Erector Set had the inverse effect. Eventually, unfortunately, style did triumph over substance.
"2 of the most important chips on the market"
Jeez, why do people have such a bad grip of the English language? Is it really that hard to understand?
Yes, "two of". As in "not exclusively of". Yes, the Intel Pentium 4 is one of the most important chips out there. And yes, so is the AMD Athlon. But so it the Motorola G4, and so for that matter is the upcoming Intel Itanium.
Now if the description of the article said "the two most important", I could understand your gripe. But it doesn't. And besides, haven't we already seen dozens of similar comparisons between Intel and AMD processor families?
By definition, pop-up ads are invasive. They interupt the browsing experience and generate very negative reactions from users.
The first thing I do when I see one is close down the offending window - I very rarely even look at what is being shoved down my throat.
The pop-up ad is just a phase. Advertisers saw that traditional banner ads weren't working so the marketing people were asked to come up with something different. However, once the user feedback tricles up the chain (via complaints, usability studies, etc) they will be consigned to the bin by any ad agency worth it's salt.
Unfortunately, as one bad idea dies a death, another one springs to life. The sucessor to the pop-up will probably be just as annoying although, eventually, the ad industry will find some form of getting the message across that 99% of the browsing public can live with.
Just proves that old adage that people will tell their bookmaker what they won't tell their priest.
What it comes down to is this: as you are after the casinos money (and they, of course, are after yours), you are far more likely to respond truthfully to a invasive questionnaire from them than you are one from Amazon.com or anyone else.
The fact that they are more likely to check up on the information provided to them (to protect themselves financially and legally) means that they are less likely to get people lying through their teeth on their books.
Apple has always been an innovative system builder with a strong emphasis on design, playing at being Ferrari while the rest of the industry was happy playing at being Ford - the Mac Classic, the 20th Anniversary Mac, the iMac, even today's standard G4's all have design features that have critics and users alike begging for more.
Unfortunately, the Cube also had its share of faults. Its fanless silence, case design and touch sensitive on-off switch were all great but were all problematic - the units overheated often, cases became cracked and the switches sometimes failed. Apple buried its head in the sand over these for a while, but it was inevitable that the writing was on the wall for the Cube, not least of all because of all the negative press that these failures generated.
Will Apple stop being innovative in terms of case design? Not likely while Steve Jobs is still at the helm, and a good thing too. Without the influence of Jobs and Apple we'd probably all be stuck with a CLI. That's not to say that CLIs are a bad thing but Apple bought the GUI to the mass market, and the mass market appeal of an easy to use PC made PCs cheaper for all of us.
Once the "bill chip" becomes available, I propose to test how well it works.
If you all send me one new bill of every denomination I will spend them wisely for you at various locations. If you can track the cash, then obviously I'll have to try harder to go undetected with the next batch you send me to test. If you can't, then I've done my job.
I offer my services freely and expect no renumeration for my time, effort or bare cheek.
If you have 20 million of the damn things all sending a signal from a seafront warehouse in Miami, then our heroes will be saved the donkey work and can spend their time doing what matters - getting the girl.
Fair point, some of the patents handed out recently seem extremely frivolous to you, me and a million others. "One Click" shopping anyone?
But the point I was trying to make was that patents lapse after a certain amount of time (20? 30? years), after which the technology enters the public domain.
Example: Sony had a patent on the technology it uses to make its Trinitron screens. While it held that patent, it had reasonable opportunity to recover its R&D spend and profit from its invention. During that time it could license the technology as it saw fit or legally persue those that infringed on its patent. Once the patent had expired though it was open season, and companies such as Mitsubishi (with their Diamondtron displays) could use Sony's invention at no cost.
All this, of course, is no help to those companies being screwed by Amazon.com's "One Click Shopping" patent.
Basically, the patent system works pretty well past the point where a patent is awarded. If we could weed out those ridiculous claims, such as those where invention of a commonly used technology was being claimed (and by that I mean one that was already accepted as being in the public domain), then the system would work as it was intended.
Because the DMCA allows content providers to regulate access and use they can set all the terms of use. And much like the database protection proposal, the de facto duration of protection under the DMCA is potentially infinite. While copyright law in 2001 protects any work created today for life of the author plus 70 years or 95 years in the case of corporate "works for hire," electronic gates do not expire.
The recent 20 year extension to copyright pushed through by legislators under the Clinton administration was heavily backed by big business. Disney was about to lose copyright on Mickey Mouse and they could't allow that to happen at any cost. Many other large corporations had similar concerns.
DMCA is being pushed by the same players, for the same reasons. This time though, they want their "extensions" up front. Or, in other words, they don't want ever to have to let go.
Why copyright law can't be more like patent law I don't understand. Is the work of an author or an illustrator really that much different from that of a designer?
So now we can give people 100% fully independent artificial heart transplants, isn't it time we moved on to brains, courage and a portable instantaneous matter transportation device (aka magic red shoes) that will take you anywhere you want to go?
Buckle up Dorothy, cos Kansas is going bye-bye...
How long before he gets bored on the job and starts flirting with the vending machines?
This from the only country in the first world where the level of medical treatment that you receive is determined by the size of your wallet.
Every other civilised society has recognised that free health care for all is a good thing. The US, for whatever reason, hasn't quite grasped the concept yet.
Or are you one of those "if they want a new kidney they can pay for it themselves" people?
When I'm sick, I don't head for the US, I just go to see my doctor down the road. The only thing he's interested in is my health, not my credit card number.
Correct me if I'm wrong here but Acme, as a car rental company are well within their rights to impose terms and conditions when they lease their property to another party.
These terms and conditions will include all the standard stuff - "you, the renter, are responsible for the vehicle, it's condition, the safety of the driver and passangers, etc."
Somewhere in there will be a section about properly adhering to the law - buckling up properly, not driving while intoxicated, not overloading the vehicle, not speeding, etc.
If they want to impose fines for certain types be behaviour, it's up to them as long as they properly inform the renter beforehand and as long as they don't improperly infringe on the renter's rights.
In other words, as long as they let you know up front what you can and can't do, the possible consequences of certain actions (eg, spoiling the upholstery or speeding), and they do so properly and fairly in the eyes of the law, then there's nothing wrong with what they are doing.
Of course, you as the renter have a choice. You can either accept their terms and conditions or you can walk down the road and take your business elsewhere.
Of course, if you are caught speeding you could always argue the point, especially if there are mitigating circumstances. Being late for work probably won't rub but driving your heavily pregnant wife to the hospital so that she doesn't give birth in the car would I guess.
Basically, the judgement in this case came down against Acme because the court felt that they had properly informed people that their actions were punishable until well after the fact. It would seem that if they had given proper notice then the court would not have taken issue so strongly.
This isn't the first time that CCTV and surveillance generally has been discussed on /. and it won't be the last.
The natural (knee-jerk?) reaction to this kind of story seems to be negative: I don't want someone, especially the government, watching me, etc, etc.
But all of those comparisons to 1984 and Enemy of the State are just so over the top. Big Brother definitely isn't watching you, and Jon Voight isn't either.
CCTVs in public places aren't placed there to infringe on the constitutional rights of you or anyone else. They can't do that because the Constitution doesn't protect your right to be invisible in a public place.
If your a known criminal or are engaging in criminal activity then a CCTV camera on the street corner isn't exactly welcome. But if your Joe Average it's no better or no worse than someone standing there taking in the view.
Watching everyone all of the time takes a lot of resources. The former East German government tried it back in the days of the Cold War. Eventually, it toppled under the strain that such a machine placed upon itself and, in turn, so did the Berlin Wall.
Paranoia is a healthy thing. In small doses.
I seem to remember buying (and playing) Final Fantasy VII for Windows while my friend enjoyed the same experience on his PlayStation. FF VIII made it to the PC too, although FF IX didn't.
The PC conversion was little more than a port over and didn't make full use of the superior performance that graphics cards of the time made over the PS1. However, it did come with a clever little Yamaha software synth, which enhanced audio for gamers who didn't own a top-notch sound card - I'm not sure how that worked, all I know is that it did.
Re-read my original post.
I am not saying that it can't be done, that Steve Bennett can't do it, that I can or that only a government can.
What I am saying is that the project, as I understand it to be, in its current form, is extremely unlikely to result in a safe launch and re-entry.
Unlike most people here, I can honestly say that I've done more than read the BBC story and browse a few related web sites. I've actually spoken to some of the players involved, as well as other prominent figures in the British amateur rocketry scene.
The concensus of opinions (theirs and mine) seems to be:
I, and 99.9 percent of the people out there want to see Steve succeed. However, we don't want to see him throw his life needlessly away. Hence the note of caution.
I've met Steve Bennett and I have to say he seems like a nice guy. I've also met some of the other people mentioned in the BBC News article and they know what they are talking about too.
I wish Steve all the luck in the world but, from what I've read and heard, he's setting himself up for a very big fall. At best, his rocket won't get off the ground (and perhaps not even off the drawing board). At worst, he's going to end up as a human firework.
Test, test, test is the mantra of every respectable physicist, especially so in the fields of aero- and astronautics. Anyone who would put his life on the line in an initial test flight of this nature has to be missing some of his marbles.