In both the MP3 case and the MPEG2 video encoding commented on, it's not the fact that it's a lossy compression that matters. You can effectively set the quality that you desire (and with MPEG2 you can use a bandwidth substantially higher than the amount used to broadcast TV and cable [ 40 Mbps vs. 6 Mhz ]). Then you can make successive identical copies of your copy with zero loss if you so desire. If each time you wanted to copy an MP3 you had to reencode it, you'd probably not run afoul of any legal entanglements because in three of four generations the signal is going to be more noise than music. It just wouldn't be worth it for the RIAA to come after you.
But it still sucks that they think they can dictate what kinds and ways we can use materials for which we have paid the asking price.
There's a ton of ACs who read the stupid-dot summary/story and go on to post "that fucker! how could he be squatting that domain! he's going to be raping my children next! why the fuck doesn't he hand of the openssh.org domain to the REAL security experts! the fucker!" Yet it turns out that Mr. de Joode is a real, honest-to-god security/crypto/privacy advocate with a great deal of knowledge and experience and a long history of service to the community.
I'd be curious to know how long stupid-dot is going to allow this sort of defamation to continue and how long it's going to be until they get their spleen yanked out in a court of law over something like this.
It's hard to argue that he attempted any kind of hijack with this since the openssh project didn't have any kind of net identity or public identity to associate with "openssh.org" in the first place. The assumption that they would be a.org is premature and definitely not in keeping with the current climate of the internet.
This is probably going to be taken the wrong way, but if Mr. de Joote's comments are accurate, then you should probably just not let Theo talk to people. Keep him coding and out of the communications chain. His history seems to be quite colored regarding situations like these.
If you've been getting crypto software from this guy for years (or whatever) then why would you assume that he has less support for crypto than the OpenSSH guys have? What makes them the god-touched keepers of the flame?
Yeah, sort of like issuing an advisory stating that it would be a good idea to keep your children away from this guy because he might be a child molestor. Particulary since the fellow who owns openssh.org has similar or better credentials than those involved with openssh.com.
So if everyone figures that everyone else is going to look at the source, who does? The only way to be sure is to do it yourself, anything else is merely complacency and asking to get whacked with a big security cluestick.
The Lynx is a neat little machine, but it has it's problems (or limitations rather.) They could have put a 65816 or 65802 in there and that would have enabled somewhat tighter code. Adding another 64K or so RAM would also be nice. Allowing a variable pitched display width and a byte level start address would also have been a very smart move as it would allowed various cheats for scrolling type games. Oh, and their encryption is somewhat annoying. The only way for a hobby developer to get code to run on there is to exploit a security flaw in some of the orignal games. I spent some time trying to track down the people who know the private keys for the boot-loader-crypto and it looks relatively impossible for a "little guy" to get that information. Not because they want to hold it secret but because they Lynx property has traded hands so many times that it's just been lost.
Taco advocates threaded mode which only shows the parent articles. The children are attached via links you have to click, then go back and peruse the rest of the parent comments. Etc.
"...so if people use it, it must be because it is good."
Let's not confuse "good UI" from "monopoly stranglehold". Macs and Win95 perform essentially the same function, so the only real difference is the UI. Which has the better UI and which has the marketshare? Slashdot may or may not have a good UI, but it certainly enjoys a monopoly position. I'm sure I'm going to hear a bunch of whining about this claim. Tell me, which 3 "Geek news" sites have print ads in glossy mags? 1) Slashdot 2) Nobody 3) Nobody else
Must agree with this. It's important to note that there is something gained even in the abscence of a sell/buy situation. I don't come here because of the interface, I come here for the discussion in spite of the UI. There are real changes that could be made that would make it easier to read and feel the flow of discussion.
(Anybody else find it humorous that Taco's "favorite" viewing mode is the one that will generate the most page reloads and thus the largest number of banners?)
That's not really an answer. It may be a use that is related to a property that only W2K has. It also may have been the sort of thing that was developed in 6-12 months rather than 6-12 years. Some of these standards take way too damned long to settle, often because of interorganizational posturing.
Regardless, it really ins't microsoft's job to ensure compatability with anyone but themselves. How many vendors will authenticate users for a VMS system? When you have a different paradigm it is often useless and futile to try and maintain 100% compatability with every little OS under the sun. Really documentation is the only issue here.
GCC has typeof which nobody else does. It also has builtin functions for alloca, abort, exit, and _exit. Which by the standards should be in a library allowing for a linktime replacement of the standard C versions. In g++ there is the headof extension. And those are just the obvious.
The parent article is wrong. With NT you certainly have the ability to install software on servers and have it properly shared out to users. Much the same way that on unix some luser can install his own private copy of e in his directory.
Unless of course that engineer was a researcher. Then he might go spend some time working on something like this. And who knows, maybe he'd be able to come up with a workable solution. Wonder what these guys who developed this do for a living?
Seems likely that they will be operating on an entirely different level here. Abstract the FS up again and some of this sorts itself out. It's also likely that this mainly intended for use on servers where backups are done in a more rigorous fashion.
God! I so much wanted to moderate in this story, but fuck. Why do you guys think that everyone at Microsoft is automatically stupider than you? You may not like their business practices, you may not like their marketing, you may hate their OSes, but their "What If..." department is as good as much any other research center out there. They undoubtably thought of every issue in this entire slashdot story in about the first ten minutes. This is actually a pretty damned cool idea, once some of you next-gen unix admins start operating in a lab/server enviroment you'll see how this can be a really fucking quality concept.
So you (or the previous poster) is saying that we should be able to go view snuff films at the library? It is already illegal in something like 90% of the states for minors to view certain classes of material. The law seems to say that a policy is required not a filter. The whole filter business was thrown up by the stupid-dot crew.
Almost all games that let you specify what type of connection you have will adapt the amount of data they are willing to send. Usually it's a matter of adding additional gamestate updates.
Slashdot Mirror
In both the MP3 case and the MPEG2 video encoding commented on, it's not the fact that it's a lossy compression that matters. You can effectively set the quality that you desire (and with MPEG2 you can use a bandwidth substantially higher than the amount used to broadcast TV and cable [ 40 Mbps vs. 6 Mhz ]). Then you can make successive identical copies of your copy with zero loss if you so desire. If each time you wanted to copy an MP3 you had to reencode it, you'd probably not run afoul of any legal entanglements because in three of four generations the signal is going to be more noise than music. It just wouldn't be worth it for the RIAA to come after you.
But it still sucks that they think they can dictate what kinds and ways we can use materials for which we have paid the asking price.
There's a ton of ACs who read the stupid-dot summary/story and go on to post "that fucker! how could he be squatting that domain! he's going to be raping my children next! why the fuck doesn't he hand of the openssh.org domain to the REAL security experts! the fucker!" Yet it turns out
that Mr. de Joode is a real, honest-to-god security/crypto/privacy advocate with a great deal of knowledge and experience and a long history of service to the community.
I'd be curious to know how long stupid-dot is going to allow this sort of defamation to continue and how long it's going to be until they get their spleen yanked out in a court of law over something like this.
It's hard to argue that he attempted any kind of hijack with this since the openssh project didn't have any kind of net identity or public identity to associate with "openssh.org" in the first place. The assumption that they would be a .org is premature and definitely not in keeping with the current climate of the internet.
Do you have any idea what the
This is probably going to be taken the wrong way, but if Mr. de Joote's comments are accurate, then you should probably just not let Theo talk to people. Keep him coding and out of the communications chain. His history seems to be quite colored regarding situations like these.
If you've been getting crypto software from this guy for years (or whatever) then why would you assume that he has less support for crypto than the OpenSSH guys have? What makes them the god-touched keepers of the flame?
Just being devil's advocate here.
Yeah, sort of like issuing an advisory stating that it would be a good idea to keep your children away from this guy because he might be a child molestor. Particulary since the fellow who owns openssh.org has similar or better credentials than those involved with openssh.com.
So if everyone figures that everyone else is going to look at the source, who does? The only way to be sure is to do it yourself, anything else is merely complacency and asking to get whacked with a big security cluestick.
The Lynx is a neat little machine, but it has it's problems (or limitations rather.) They could have put a 65816 or 65802 in there and that would have enabled somewhat tighter code. Adding another 64K or so RAM would also be nice. Allowing a variable pitched display width and a byte level start address would also have been a very smart move as it would allowed various cheats for scrolling type games. Oh, and their encryption is somewhat annoying. The only way for a hobby developer to get code to run on there is to exploit a security flaw in some of the orignal games. I spent some time trying to track down the people who know the private keys for the boot-loader-crypto and it looks relatively impossible for a "little guy" to get that information. Not because they want to hold it secret but because they Lynx property has traded hands so many times that it's just been lost.
Taco advocates threaded mode which only shows the parent articles. The children are attached via links you have to click, then go back and peruse the rest of the parent comments. Etc.
Must agree with this. It's important to note that there is something gained even in the abscence of a sell/buy situation. I don't come here because of the interface, I come here for the discussion in spite of the UI. There are real changes that could be made that would make it easier to read and feel the flow of discussion.
(Anybody else find it humorous that Taco's "favorite" viewing mode is the one that will generate the most page reloads and thus the largest number of banners?)
That's not really an answer. It may be a use that is related to a property that only W2K has. It also may have been the sort of thing that was developed in 6-12 months rather than 6-12 years. Some of these standards take way too damned long to settle, often because of interorganizational posturing.
Regardless, it really ins't microsoft's job to ensure compatability with anyone but themselves. How many vendors will authenticate users for a VMS system? When you have a different paradigm it is often useless and futile to try and maintain 100% compatability with every little OS under the sun. Really documentation is the only issue here.
GCC has typeof which nobody else does. It also has builtin functions for alloca, abort, exit, and _exit. Which by the standards should be in a library allowing for a linktime replacement of the standard C versions. In g++ there is the headof extension. And those are just the obvious.
This is annoying in that it's not documented. But heaven forbid anyone, and especially Microsoft, finds that the "standards" don't meet their needs.
This is a non-issue. It's been solved for a long time in Comp. Sci.
The parent article is wrong. With NT you certainly have the ability to install software on servers and have it properly shared out to users. Much the same way that on unix some luser can install his own private copy of e in his directory.
Unless of course that engineer was a researcher. Then he might go spend some time working on something like this. And who knows, maybe he'd be able to come up with a workable solution. Wonder what these guys who developed this do for a living?
Disks don't usually fail in single sectors these days. Plus you don't use this on your workstation, you use it on your server(s).
Seems likely that they will be operating on an entirely different level here. Abstract the FS up again and some of this sorts itself out. It's also likely that this mainly intended for use on servers where backups are done in a more rigorous fashion.
Then they've undoubtedly got a marketing department with the technical savvy of 99% of the Linux developers out there. Beans.
God! I so much wanted to moderate in this story, but fuck. Why do you guys think that everyone at Microsoft is automatically stupider than you? You may not like their business practices, you may not like their marketing, you may hate their OSes, but their "What If..." department is as good as much any other research center out there. They undoubtably thought of every issue in this entire slashdot story in about the first ten minutes. This is actually a pretty damned cool idea, once some of you next-gen unix admins start operating in a lab/server enviroment you'll see how this can be a really fucking quality concept.
So you (or the previous poster) is saying that we should be able to go view snuff films at the library? It is already illegal in something like 90% of the states for minors to view certain classes of material. The law seems to say that a policy is required not a filter. The whole filter business was thrown up by the stupid-dot crew.
The throttle on my car has a "setting" of zero. Sounds like a reasonable setting for napster traffic.
Almost all games that let you specify what type of connection you have will adapt the amount of data they are willing to send. Usually it's a matter of adding additional gamestate updates.
Der, not because, became.