Let alone the ability for the progammer to keep track of all the various patents. You can only code around a patent that you are aware of. I think the scary part is trying to keep track of it all.
I've read a couple of posts that suggest the reader would likely hunt out and smash the offending advertising emitter using this technology. I'd suggest that you'd even have the legal right to do so!
This technology creates the offending sound 'in your head'. Litteraly, the sound is created by the resonating waves heading your eardrum or bones in your ear. This is as close to abuse as you can get, imho. You can't turn away or tune it out.
It's one thing for an ad to sit there waiting to be looked at, or a background noise which are human brains are accustomed to tuning out. It's yet an entirely different thing to have sound resonating in your head which you cannot stop nor have really much sense of the emminating source.
Just think of the problems caused by billboards on the freeway... 'Um, excuse me, while your driving by at 60 mph, would you consider a nice refreshing.'
Clearly the MMOG space is over-saturated with companies looking to produce titles with millions of active players, huge budgets and so-forth. Likely 95% of these companies will fail, especially the independants.
There is, however, still vast amounts of MMOG market space waiting to be tapped. I think there's no question we're going to start seeing lots of very creative, lower key and alternative MMOG's with very unique and exciting concepts emerging on the scene. These are the types of games the indies CAN succeed with and WANT to develop.
Take Imperial Wars for example. This is a very exciting alternative to the hack and slash MMOG's out there now. It's a turn based (almost play-by-mail like) game that doesn't require you to spend 30-50hrs per week waiting around for some MOB to respawn, but requires that you socially interact with your team in order to succeed. It captures both the edge-of-your-seat strategy and the social aspects of the online community.
Companies that capatilize on creating games that Joe Average has time to play, games that have extreme strategy but also harness the community effect of the internet, are sure to reap rewards.
Frankly, I think software companies _should_ be liable for their bugs, which would obviously include liability for any backdoors. This would make a huge difference in the overall security of software across the board, but the ramifications of this thinking are another subject.
You made a point about a bug being unintentional and a backdoor being intentional. I guess my point is that I don't see that clear cut of a difference. I have coded several bugs very well knowing they could possibly be exploited. However, when the whip is being cracked, one tends to sacrifice certain things. Not that this justifies it though!
What's a company going to do if and when they are brought to court due to a problem with a backdoor? Aren't they going to say they aren't liable for it because it should have been removed from the production release and is therefore a bug? This seems to be a pretty strong argument for the company to take, since in general there is no liability for software security (unless stipulated otherwise via a contract or something).
As for your particular situation with the movie industry, I don't think it's the backdoor itself that will get you into trouble, it's the fact that you've got a copy of something you shouldn't have. It doesn't matter how you got a copy of the latest movie, but that you possess such a copy. This is quite likely to be the stronger argument in court, don't you think?
You're absolutely right as for the 'deepest pockets' point, however I don't think that's exactly on topic. In as much as it pertains to a small development firm or a contractor, you're right, don't mess with the big bucks (whether M$ or the movie industry). This is good, although a bit obvious, advice.
I was just going to use some moderator points on this article, but now I have to reply to this comment (which has been expressed a couple of times elsewhere)
If a software company (notorious Microsoft comes to mind) can get away without being liable for the countless bugs that cost untold billions in damages, why do you think a company with a 'backdoor' in their product is going to be anymore liable? If push comes to shove, the company will just say it's a bug and will be fixed with the next service pack.
No question the dude who wrote the code will get the boot, but do you really think that a bug and a backdoor are that much different?
In my economics classes I learned that in perfect competition, profits are driven to zero in the long run. Why is the software industry so messed up??
The software industry is 'so messed up' for the exact reason that there is no perfect competition. If there weren't so many software monopolies (MS obviously, but others too), then software gross profits might actually start looking more realistic. This just proves the monopolistic nature of the software industry.
Not that it would be impossible to boot, but without the CD-ROM, it makes it more difficult. Can a USB CD-ROM be used to boot the machine? You'd have to have a boot prom on the ethernet card or attach a floppy/CD-ROM similar to a laptop.
The biggest mistake you could make would be to start out thinking you're going to get 40+ hours per week of work knocking down your door straight out of the chute. Unless you already have several clients and/or opportunities in the bag, you're most likely to find yourself without serious cash inflow for a long period of time.
The best thing for me has been to have a solid working relationship with a client or two. They provide me as much work as I want and allow me to explore other opportunities as they come along. Granted, this leaves me without a lot of need to actively market myself (I am known solely by word of mouth), but it has created a great way to bridge myself until I am able to get more work.
I can't imagine starting a consulting gig without having an already established relationship with some business. If you can live on a little less to start out, but keep the bills paid with enough work from this one business, then you could easily spend say 3/4 time working to pay rent with the remaining going to foster new business relationships.
And, don't dismiss straight out being hired by another company, all the while building up contacts and side business until you've got enough to break free and make a serious go at it. Likely it is that the company you would be hired by would be your first and most loyal business client when you're on your own.
Oh, and don't think for a minute that because the economy is down makes it any easier. I would definetly say that the slow economy has made it even harder as a freelancer. Most companies are in sphincter lock when considering spending money on consultants. I believe that most companies will not likely be using consultants for some time while they hunker down to withstand the current slump. Once the money is flowing again though, we should be in good shape. (though, of course, the slow market might be just enough niche where you can get some consulting work due to company layoffs and low price points)
Yes yes yes, I agree. But I don't think the 'artistic rights' is the strongest argument.
The strongest argument, IMO, is that by redistributing the edited materials, you're redistributing the copyrighted works of another. You can't remove some scenes and still distribute it as the original movie with the original movie name. And, you obviously can't use it because you don't have rights to the remaining footage.
However, once the movie is in the hands of the end user, then fair use comes into play. I can do whatever I want with what I've bought so long as I'm not redistributing (to anyone off the street) and definetly not making a buck off of it.
Any edits by the end user is clearly 'fair use'. The companies that are doing DVD overlays (MovieShield and ClearPlay) no question have a green light.
Slashdot Mirror
Let alone the ability for the progammer to keep track of all the various patents. You can only code around a patent that you are aware of. I think the scary part is trying to keep track of it all.
I've read a couple of posts that suggest the reader would likely hunt out and smash the offending advertising emitter using this technology. I'd suggest that you'd even have the legal right to do so!
This technology creates the offending sound 'in your head'. Litteraly, the sound is created by the resonating waves heading your eardrum or bones in your ear. This is as close to abuse as you can get, imho. You can't turn away or tune it out.
It's one thing for an ad to sit there waiting to be looked at, or a background noise which are human brains are accustomed to tuning out. It's yet an entirely different thing to have sound resonating in your head which you cannot stop nor have really much sense of the emminating source.
Just think of the problems caused by billboards on the freeway... 'Um, excuse me, while your driving by at 60 mph, would you consider a nice refreshing
Clearly the MMOG space is over-saturated with companies looking to produce titles with millions of active players, huge budgets and so-forth. Likely 95% of these companies will fail, especially the independants.
There is, however, still vast amounts of MMOG market space waiting to be tapped. I think there's no question we're going to start seeing lots of very creative, lower key and alternative MMOG's with very unique and exciting concepts emerging on the scene. These are the types of games the indies CAN succeed with and WANT to develop.
Take Imperial Wars for example. This is a very exciting alternative to the hack and slash MMOG's out there now. It's a turn based (almost play-by-mail like) game that doesn't require you to spend 30-50hrs per week waiting around for some MOB to respawn, but requires that you socially interact with your team in order to succeed. It captures both the edge-of-your-seat strategy and the social aspects of the online community.
Companies that capatilize on creating games that Joe Average has time to play, games that have extreme strategy but also harness the community effect of the internet, are sure to reap rewards.
You have good points...
Frankly, I think software companies _should_ be liable for their bugs, which would obviously include liability for any backdoors. This would make a huge difference in the overall security of software across the board, but the ramifications of this thinking are another subject.
You made a point about a bug being unintentional and a backdoor being intentional. I guess my point is that I don't see that clear cut of a difference. I have coded several bugs very well knowing they could possibly be exploited. However, when the whip is being cracked, one tends to sacrifice certain things. Not that this justifies it though!
What's a company going to do if and when they are brought to court due to a problem with a backdoor? Aren't they going to say they aren't liable for it because it should have been removed from the production release and is therefore a bug? This seems to be a pretty strong argument for the company to take, since in general there is no liability for software security (unless stipulated otherwise via a contract or something).
As for your particular situation with the movie industry, I don't think it's the backdoor itself that will get you into trouble, it's the fact that you've got a copy of something you shouldn't have. It doesn't matter how you got a copy of the latest movie, but that you possess such a copy. This is quite likely to be the stronger argument in court, don't you think?
You're absolutely right as for the 'deepest pockets' point, however I don't think that's exactly on topic. In as much as it pertains to a small development firm or a contractor, you're right, don't mess with the big bucks (whether M$ or the movie industry). This is good, although a bit obvious, advice.
Liability my ass!
I was just going to use some moderator points on this article, but now I have to reply to this comment (which has been expressed a couple of times elsewhere)
If a software company (notorious Microsoft comes to mind) can get away without being liable for the countless bugs that cost untold billions in damages, why do you think a company with a 'backdoor' in their product is going to be anymore liable? If push comes to shove, the company will just say it's a bug and will be fixed with the next service pack.
No question the dude who wrote the code will get the boot, but do you really think that a bug and a backdoor are that much different?
Where's the violin solo?
The software industry is 'so messed up' for the exact reason that there is no perfect competition. If there weren't so many software monopolies (MS obviously, but others too), then software gross profits might actually start looking more realistic. This just proves the monopolistic nature of the software industry.
Not that it would be impossible to boot, but without the CD-ROM, it makes it more difficult. Can a USB CD-ROM be used to boot the machine? You'd have to have a boot prom on the ethernet card or attach a floppy/CD-ROM similar to a laptop.
Start small is right.
The biggest mistake you could make would be to start out thinking you're going to get 40+ hours per week of work knocking down your door straight out of the chute. Unless you already have several clients and/or opportunities in the bag, you're most likely to find yourself without serious cash inflow for a long period of time.
The best thing for me has been to have a solid working relationship with a client or two. They provide me as much work as I want and allow me to explore other opportunities as they come along. Granted, this leaves me without a lot of need to actively market myself (I am known solely by word of mouth), but it has created a great way to bridge myself until I am able to get more work.
I can't imagine starting a consulting gig without having an already established relationship with some business. If you can live on a little less to start out, but keep the bills paid with enough work from this one business, then you could easily spend say 3/4 time working to pay rent with the remaining going to foster new business relationships.
And, don't dismiss straight out being hired by another company, all the while building up contacts and side business until you've got enough to break free and make a serious go at it. Likely it is that the company you would be hired by would be your first and most loyal business client when you're on your own.
Oh, and don't think for a minute that because the economy is down makes it any easier. I would definetly say that the slow economy has made it even harder as a freelancer. Most companies are in sphincter lock when considering spending money on consultants. I believe that most companies will not likely be using consultants for some time while they hunker down to withstand the current slump. Once the money is flowing again though, we should be in good shape. (though, of course, the slow market might be just enough niche where you can get some consulting work due to company layoffs and low price points)
Adam
Yes yes yes, I agree. But I don't think the 'artistic rights' is the strongest argument.
The strongest argument, IMO, is that by redistributing the edited materials, you're redistributing the copyrighted works of another. You can't remove some scenes and still distribute it as the original movie with the original movie name. And, you obviously can't use it because you don't have rights to the remaining footage.
However, once the movie is in the hands of the end user, then fair use comes into play. I can do whatever I want with what I've bought so long as I'm not redistributing (to anyone off the street) and definetly not making a buck off of it.
Any edits by the end user is clearly 'fair use'. The companies that are doing DVD overlays (MovieShield and ClearPlay) no question have a green light.
Adam