"Don't they have something better to do during the summer than hack the P2P servers?" asked the hacker representative, who asked not to be identified. "Perhaps it at least took 10 minutes away from their stealing money."
Geez, It's like listening to a bunch of children, eh?
There is a group in the scientific community that believes that gravity has a particle called a graviton. Unfortunately though, the amount of energy needed in a particle accelerator to create a graviton is immense (Aproximately 5 light-years in radius particle accelerator is needed. I believe.).
If I remember correctly an article in Scientific American (A Unified Physics by 2050?; December 1999; by Weinberg) discusses this concept in more detail.
The old IBM Ispiratis were classic examples of VCR Computers. They were sleek, black, had a dvd, and one Christmas they were selling (w/o a monitor) for $499CAN.
They don't sell Ispiratis anymore, but their netvistas still have the potential (with a few case mods) to be sleek, black, cool little VCR computers for your home entertainment system.
(Or if you cold find an Ispirati case and install a better board and memory in it, it would work as well.):-)
Now the enemy will just coat all of their trucks, cars and personnel with tinfoil to reflect the rays coming from above... (Tinfoil would reflect the laser back at the plane... even though it would also cook you.)
Perhaps those guys with the tinfoil hats at the hospital had a point.:-)
The only thing needed to destroy windows....
on
Take a Mac User to Lunch
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Besides a hammer of course.:-)
Is to offer Mac OS X on the PC platform. If I could get that quality of a system on my computer, I would instantly switch over. I think a lot of other people would as well. Considering how user friendly, and quality of an interface it is.
Mac could be the OS Monopoly if it only started to port its stuff to the PC Platforms.
Australia rules that selling pirated games is illegal.
The guy in Canada was mostly burned for selling the pirated games, not for installing the mod chips. It just looks better in an article to emphasize the mod chip aspect. We have no laws against modding equipment, even if it breaks copyright. Hell, if you can find a good Canadian server that will let it on, you can have DeCSS online up here.:-)
Well, if I may take this to a hypothetical extreme. Let's look at Toccata & Fugue.
It's common for University students and other music artists to take a piece of "open-source" work and adapt the general theme, chord progression, etc. to another piece. Perhaps the only reason we don't see a Toccata & Fugue 1.1 is because no one who dare call it such a humourous name. Instead, they call it something that would fit their own taste. Even though in the end it is the basically the same base.
Perhaps all music has developed this way. Taking a piece, modifying it somewhat, and calling it your own. 'cept nowadays, unless you work for the big companies, you cannot take any part of any piece and use it in your own because you would be breaking copyright. (There are artists who have used the same chord progressions and have been sued for it.)
Maybe, The 1.1 is out, perhaps even the 2.0 is out. It's just that the artists who wrote those pieces wouldn't dare call it T & F 1.1 or T & F 2.0.
An interesting thought.
I do like the fact that we can satire pieces of copywritten material, even though we can't do much more. (Maybe we should just make a big joke Windows system that's open source, and full of satire.:-))
but cannot another artists _interpretation_ of Toccata & Fuge 1.1 be considered improvement. The basis is still there, and it is still the beautiful classical piece. But each artist has the right to play it as they wish. Add a staccato here, a fortissimo there. They all have the right to improve on the general piece. Even some modern jazz, rock and techno artists have taken these pieces and adapted them to their own style of music making them their own. In a way working on a open-source piece of art.
I remember picasso's quotation, "Good artists innovate, Great artists steal." (I think). Perhaps it is not stealing as much as taking an idea that is good and attempting to improve upon it so the final product is potentially better.
I know when I hear Toccata & Fugue by the Montreal Symphony Orchestra, it is a much different feeling then when I hear it performed by the Edmonton Symphony Orchestra. I know that I have heard many interesting takes on Ode to Joy by Jazz Artists and Techno musicians.
Open-Source doesn't really attack corporatism as it does attack Mass-Production Media.
Software, Music, Movies, Books, etc. Are all money makers based on the fact that they can mass produce a product that people will pay for. On an individual basis, the $16 or so made off of a single CD, book or movie doesn't matter unless they can product millions of these $16 products and sell them.
With the internet though, it has opened the possibility of distribution of IP products for free or near free prices. Thus the business model of these IP companies is not applicable anymore without forcing the public to play by their rules by legislating laws into place.
The Open Source Movement has a weird effect of showing what happens when people can produce the same products and share it with everyone else, allowing them to improve on it. Before hte internet, when I coded a small program I could only share it among my close friends easily. Now I can share it with everyone, and if it is useful, everyone can contribute to it.
In a way it is like the folksongs from way back. Somebody thought it up, and shared it among his friends and family, or in performance, thus making his money from his actual work and not a 'photocopy' of his work. Then other musicians got it, and would play with it, producing even better music. Some of the great classical pieces are basically open source folk songs that have been improved upon by the masters. Since folk songs could easily spread by word of mouth, and didn't cost anything to spread, these songs became the equivalent of Open Source Music. Everyone was able to enjoy it, and no one had to pay anyone for the right to hear, see, learn or play the song themselves.
Now, we can pass programs, books, poetry and more using the internet and allow others who may be better (may be worse) then us to improve on them and create a better product in the long run. It's not a new economic model, it's just an old one coming back in a new form.
I heard once that people don't like change, they like things to remain the same as long as possible. I think it would be more correct to say people with power and money don't like change, and will go to great lengths to prevent it.
Linux: B Win 95: D Win 98: D Win 2000: C Win ME: D+ Win XP: C+ OS/2 Warp: B- Unix: B+ DOS: C- MAC OS X: A-
Any others? Any changes you think are needed? I am willing to accept any modifications. (This isn't flamebait, just encouraging conversation on report cards.)
I think the biggest problem for AOL would be the difficulty of handling redirection of messages sent to their servers to the other IM servers securely.
You see, all of their IM protocols are proprietary, and thus they would have to receive a message intended for messenger service, recognize that it's meant for , convert it to 's format, and then redirect it to all while trying to keep their servers running at an economically reasonable peak efficiency with their own messages.
What really needs to happen is for a general non-proprietary protocol to be developed for IM, and then have all of the IM servers use that. Perhaps this would be a good OS project for people to do (I think I heard someone is already working on it.)
But, that's probably why it's so hard for them. It's hard to come up with a non-proprietary protocol all by yourself.
I think he was likely fined mostly for the sales of the pirated games. I don't believe we have an equivalent to the DMCA in Canada, and therefore the mod chip is perfectly allowable to be sold in Canada. He got caught for software piracy, not for breaking DRM.
But, I am not absolutely sure on this. Could a Canadian Lawyer verify this for me? Also, do you know if he could get caught on that Mod chip for a different reason?
Especially if you are a woman spammer.
on
Spam Doesn't Work?
·
· Score: 2
Gotta love this line: Some just tried chatting "her" up with some very personal questions.
I guess even if it is a person you don't know, and you are a single male. Anyone is a potential partner.:-P
In a way, it kinda proves a that porn spam is effective when people try to chat someone up who isn't even being suggestive.
Won't this really only be useful for the people on campus, even if someone in New York had an equivalent HS connection because of the inherent bottlenecks that exists on the current internet.
That's highly impressive that he was able to even do a story about it without being dismissed or reprimanded.
I hear so many stories about journalists who publish articles that are contrary to the owner or corporate sponsors viewpoints and then are subsequently sacked.
I believe if a journalist can do it, and is willing to do it, feel free. But, in today society where big media rule. it's quite hard for those journalists to get the nerve to do it and then afterwards remain working for the big media.
I didn't know that PPAs had to be displayed, I thought the TV station could refuse any advertisement it was given. Therefore, it would be able to refuse any advertisement contrary to it's goals, or that would be bad for business. Like an advertisement denouncing something that will help them make more money.
Heck, a good Compaq Pocket PC can play movies. I had a representative from IBM come to my university and talk with us, and his Compaq Pocket PC was capable of playing movies along with a lot of other things. (He showed it off during the break to the few real geeks there.:-)
The big problem remains though. Can't the media just say no to these commercials because it makes them look bad?
Most of the recording companies are just part of larger media conglomerates, and there is no way you'll convince NBC/CBS/Whatever to put on an advert saying that they are taking away people's rights. They don't have to play the commercial, no matter how much money you offer them.
If CCU gets the rights to broadcast online without paying the fees, then it looks really bad for everyone involved because it'll look like congress and the big corps are all scratching eachother's backs. As well, the recording companies will raise more hell because they won't be getting all of the money they feel they deserve.
If CCU doesn't get the rights to broadcast online without paying the fees, then CCU will raise all hell, because they already broadcast for minimal fees over radiowaves. Plus, having a media conglomerate mad at you isn't a good way to win elections, I think the politicians have found.
This situation, if resolved, will be resolved totally behind closed doors I think, because short of repealing the law altogether, the only solution will leave everyone with egg on their faces.
Just a really interesting catch-22 when laws aren't thought through completely.
There is a considerable difference between a gun and a lock on the door to your house.
Just as there is a considerable difference between nuclear weapons and "munitions-grade encryption".
Encryption doesn't have the power to kill anyone, it just has the power to protect privacy and hide information. While a nuclear weapon has the power to destroy.
If they ban encryption, why not ban locks, doors, window shades, make walls out of glass, and allow video cameras and audio tapes to be placed in every nook and cranny of your house. You have nothing to hide, that's why high-grade encryption is useless right?
Think about it.
God, I love the fact I am a Canadian at times like these.
Slashdot Mirror
The fight is now on for Eunuchs.com. I hope they have money left!
Well, I don't think they'll(Eunuchs.com) have the balls to fight back against a big company like Open Source.
"Don't they have something better to do during the summer than hack the P2P servers?" asked the hacker representative, who asked not to be identified. "Perhaps it at least took 10 minutes away from their stealing money."
Geez, It's like listening to a bunch of children, eh?
Actually,
There is a group in the scientific community that believes that gravity has a particle called a graviton. Unfortunately though, the amount of energy needed in a particle accelerator to create a graviton is immense (Aproximately 5 light-years in radius particle accelerator is needed. I believe.).
If I remember correctly an article in Scientific American (A Unified Physics by 2050?; December 1999; by Weinberg) discusses this concept in more detail.
Senator (insert name here): I propose we initiatiate Military Law across the United States
Congress: BOO! NAY!!
Senator (Someone else): I would like to add something to that bill. A pay raise for all of us of 150%.
Congress: YAY! WHOO!!!
And the bill is passed...
Strange how these things work, eh?
The old IBM Ispiratis were classic examples of VCR Computers. They were sleek, black, had a dvd, and one Christmas they were selling (w/o a monitor) for $499CAN.
:-)
They don't sell Ispiratis anymore, but their netvistas still have the potential (with a few case mods) to be sleek, black, cool little VCR computers for your home entertainment system.
(Or if you cold find an Ispirati case and install a better board and memory in it, it would work as well.)
Now the enemy will just coat all of their trucks, cars and personnel with tinfoil to reflect the rays coming from above... (Tinfoil would reflect the laser back at the plane... even though it would also cook you.)
:-)
Perhaps those guys with the tinfoil hats at the hospital had a point.
Besides a hammer of course. :-)
Is to offer Mac OS X on the PC platform. If I could get that quality of a system on my computer, I would instantly switch over. I think a lot of other people would as well. Considering how user friendly, and quality of an interface it is.
Mac could be the OS Monopoly if it only started to port its stuff to the PC Platforms.
Australia rules that selling pirated games is illegal.
:-)
The guy in Canada was mostly burned for selling the pirated games, not for installing the mod chips. It just looks better in an article to emphasize the mod chip aspect. We have no laws against modding equipment, even if it breaks copyright. Hell, if you can find a good Canadian server that will let it on, you can have DeCSS online up here.
Well, if I may take this to a hypothetical extreme. Let's look at Toccata & Fugue.
:-))
It's common for University students and other music artists to take a piece of "open-source" work and adapt the general theme, chord progression, etc. to another piece. Perhaps the only reason we don't see a Toccata & Fugue 1.1 is because no one who dare call it such a humourous name. Instead, they call it something that would fit their own taste. Even though in the end it is the basically the same base.
Perhaps all music has developed this way. Taking a piece, modifying it somewhat, and calling it your own. 'cept nowadays, unless you work for the big companies, you cannot take any part of any piece and use it in your own because you would be breaking copyright. (There are artists who have used the same chord progressions and have been sued for it.)
Maybe, The 1.1 is out, perhaps even the 2.0 is out. It's just that the artists who wrote those pieces wouldn't dare call it T & F 1.1 or T & F 2.0.
An interesting thought.
I do like the fact that we can satire pieces of copywritten material, even though we can't do much more. (Maybe we should just make a big joke Windows system that's open source, and full of satire.
You've gotten a copy of OSX10.2? Where did you get it from?
The first point is very true.
:-)
but cannot another artists _interpretation_ of Toccata & Fuge 1.1 be considered improvement. The basis is still there, and it is still the beautiful classical piece. But each artist has the right to play it as they wish. Add a staccato here, a fortissimo there. They all have the right to improve on the general piece. Even some modern jazz, rock and techno artists have taken these pieces and adapted them to their own style of music making them their own. In a way working on a open-source piece of art.
I remember picasso's quotation, "Good artists innovate, Great artists steal." (I think). Perhaps it is not stealing as much as taking an idea that is good and attempting to improve upon it so the final product is potentially better.
I know when I hear Toccata & Fugue by the Montreal Symphony Orchestra, it is a much different feeling then when I hear it performed by the Edmonton Symphony Orchestra. I know that I have heard many interesting takes on Ode to Joy by Jazz Artists and Techno musicians.
Perhaps Art can be open sourced afterall.
Actually, his brother (Richard Mann) works at the University of Waterloo, he taught me one of my CS classes last term. He is a AI researcher as well.
:-)
His family's just a wild group of people. Really fun to hang around for short bursts of time.
Open-Source doesn't really attack corporatism as it does attack Mass-Production Media.
Software, Music, Movies, Books, etc. Are all money makers based on the fact that they can mass produce a product that people will pay for. On an individual basis, the $16 or so made off of a single CD, book or movie doesn't matter unless they can product millions of these $16 products and sell them.
With the internet though, it has opened the possibility of distribution of IP products for free or near free prices. Thus the business model of these IP companies is not applicable anymore without forcing the public to play by their rules by legislating laws into place.
The Open Source Movement has a weird effect of showing what happens when people can produce the same products and share it with everyone else, allowing them to improve on it. Before hte internet, when I coded a small program I could only share it among my close friends easily. Now I can share it with everyone, and if it is useful, everyone can contribute to it.
In a way it is like the folksongs from way back. Somebody thought it up, and shared it among his friends and family, or in performance, thus making his money from his actual work and not a 'photocopy' of his work. Then other musicians got it, and would play with it, producing even better music. Some of the great classical pieces are basically open source folk songs that have been improved upon by the masters. Since folk songs could easily spread by word of mouth, and didn't cost anything to spread, these songs became the equivalent of Open Source Music. Everyone was able to enjoy it, and no one had to pay anyone for the right to hear, see, learn or play the song themselves.
Now, we can pass programs, books, poetry and more using the internet and allow others who may be better (may be worse) then us to improve on them and create a better product in the long run. It's not a new economic model, it's just an old one coming back in a new form.
I heard once that people don't like change, they like things to remain the same as long as possible. I think it would be more correct to say people with power and money don't like change, and will go to great lengths to prevent it.
Some interesting thoughts.
Linux: B
Win 95: D
Win 98: D
Win 2000: C
Win ME: D+
Win XP: C+
OS/2 Warp: B-
Unix: B+
DOS: C-
MAC OS X: A-
Any others? Any changes you think are needed? I am willing to accept any modifications. (This isn't flamebait, just encouraging conversation on report cards.)
I think the biggest problem for AOL would be the difficulty of handling redirection of messages sent to their servers to the other IM servers securely.
You see, all of their IM protocols are proprietary, and thus they would have to receive a message intended for messenger service, recognize that it's meant for , convert it to 's format, and then redirect it to all while trying to keep their servers running at an economically reasonable peak efficiency with their own messages.
What really needs to happen is for a general non-proprietary protocol to be developed for IM, and then have all of the IM servers use that. Perhaps this would be a good OS project for people to do (I think I heard someone is already working on it.)
But, that's probably why it's so hard for them. It's hard to come up with a non-proprietary protocol all by yourself.
I think he was likely fined mostly for the sales of the pirated games. I don't believe we have an equivalent to the DMCA in Canada, and therefore the mod chip is perfectly allowable to be sold in Canada. He got caught for software piracy, not for breaking DRM.
But, I am not absolutely sure on this. Could a Canadian Lawyer verify this for me? Also, do you know if he could get caught on that Mod chip for a different reason?
Gotta love this line:
:-P
Some just tried chatting "her" up with some very personal questions.
I guess even if it is a person you don't know, and you are a single male. Anyone is a potential partner.
In a way, it kinda proves a that porn spam is effective when people try to chat someone up who isn't even being suggestive.
Won't this really only be useful for the people on campus, even if someone in New York had an equivalent HS connection because of the inherent bottlenecks that exists on the current internet.
I know
NSA = National Security Agency (No Such Agency)
CIA = Central Intelligence Agency
FBI = Federal Bureau of Investigation
But what does TLA mean?
Previous work
Excellent JPEG INFO FAQ.
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/jpeg-faq/
The JPEG standard was designed by the "Joint Photographic Experts Group"
This patent is either totally off base, or someone is playing games with the patent system. There is no way that this patent will stand up as is.
That's highly impressive that he was able to even do a story about it without being dismissed or reprimanded.
I hear so many stories about journalists who publish articles that are contrary to the owner or corporate sponsors viewpoints and then are subsequently sacked.
I believe if a journalist can do it, and is willing to do it, feel free. But, in today society where big media rule. it's quite hard for those journalists to get the nerve to do it and then afterwards remain working for the big media.
I didn't know that PPAs had to be displayed, I thought the TV station could refuse any advertisement it was given. Therefore, it would be able to refuse any advertisement contrary to it's goals, or that would be bad for business. Like an advertisement denouncing something that will help them make more money.
Heck, a good Compaq Pocket PC can play movies. I had a representative from IBM come to my university and talk with us, and his Compaq Pocket PC was capable of playing movies along with a lot of other things. (He showed it off during the break to the few real geeks there. :-)
The big problem remains though. Can't the media just say no to these commercials because it makes them look bad?
Most of the recording companies are just part of larger media conglomerates, and there is no way you'll convince NBC/CBS/Whatever to put on an advert saying that they are taking away people's rights. They don't have to play the commercial, no matter how much money you offer them.
That's the big catch-22 and conflict of interest.
Well, here's an interesting catch-22.
If CCU gets the rights to broadcast online without paying the fees, then it looks really bad for everyone involved because it'll look like congress and the big corps are all scratching eachother's backs. As well, the recording companies will raise more hell because they won't be getting all of the money they feel they deserve.
If CCU doesn't get the rights to broadcast online without paying the fees, then CCU will raise all hell, because they already broadcast for minimal fees over radiowaves. Plus, having a media conglomerate mad at you isn't a good way to win elections, I think the politicians have found.
This situation, if resolved, will be resolved totally behind closed doors I think, because short of repealing the law altogether, the only solution will leave everyone with egg on their faces.
Just a really interesting catch-22 when laws aren't thought through completely.
There is a considerable difference between a gun and a lock on the door to your house.
Just as there is a considerable difference between nuclear weapons and "munitions-grade encryption".
Encryption doesn't have the power to kill anyone, it just has the power to protect privacy and hide information. While a nuclear weapon has the power to destroy.
If they ban encryption, why not ban locks, doors, window shades, make walls out of glass, and allow video cameras and audio tapes to be placed in every nook and cranny of your house. You have nothing to hide, that's why high-grade encryption is useless right?
Think about it.
God, I love the fact I am a Canadian at times like these.