I think if people would just ask in a civil way for the opportunity to write a linux driver then HP would comply, because they don't want to lose customers, just like anybody else out there. Also did you try to use the configuration of an earlier version of the scanner? I know with printers that sometimes works...
PS - What does that code mean in: "I'm talking about the 31337 h4x0r kids with the bad attitude"... I've seen it on this site before but I'm confused as to what it is, is it ROT-13 or something? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Well court TV does deal with real cases and real law at least. I was just making a joke though, no need for mean spirited remarks. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
For as long as he's a flight risk. It's at the judge's discretion, but the crime charged (different from the crime or lack of crime committed) is a hostile one, with a foreigner "attacking" an American company, and since the judge probably doesn't understand what's going on, he will be held without bail until either A) the trial starts, B) the trial is over, or C) his defense can pass a motion for his release on his own recognisance (spelling?).
Of course I only know that from watching Law and Order, so I could be wrong:-) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
``Really, what this is doing is companies are using the law to hide the fact that their security is bad,'' said Bruce Schneier, a cryptography expert and chief technology officer at Counterpane Internet Security, a computer network monitoring firm.
``The information for how to copy PDF files is being treated the same as lock picks and nuclear information,'' Schneier said.
Amen.
I think Adobe is just making a stink here, but there will be no real consequences for the nice Russian man. The have to prove malicious intent and since his software can only be used with purchased versions of PDF for making backup files, I don't think he's done anything illegal. Of course most people on a jury won't understand any of this, so I guess he has a chance of doing some time.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Anybody ever been to Stone Mountain in Atlanta, GA? They run the same show every night for months at a time, I bet they'd love some software like this to spice up the act relatively inexpensively. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
OK, so it was very noble of this person to point out the faults in the protection scheme so that others would know that their documents were not so safe after all...
However, if "these are people after all" in Adobe, then why would it be such a bad idea to present this to them first rather than just shoving the information out to the general public. I'm not saying to keep it from everyone, just give Adobe a heads up so that they can deal with it correctly and make their package better. Of course if Adobe says "ok now don't tell anyone," then I would say "kiss my ass, the people must know." Which would probably bring some legal action, however at least by telling them first you can prove no animosity towards the company, thus lessening the penalty or removing it. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Haha, well I know it isn't much, but my point is that there are people out there who blindly will send in the $5 or whatever it is people ask for those programs. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hey, instead of messing up the quality of the songs, why don't they just issue licenses with each audio CD. If you want 5 copies, buy 5 licenses. I know I wouldn't pay the extra money, but there are people out there who would, just look at the money from shareware... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
OK, so we want protection against a "rouge" nation and their supposed nuclear arsenal... is that really what we want? I think Bush wants to start some new controversy, which he can hopefully come out of victoriously, as if he loses, we all die. Think about it this way: today, America is the richest country. We have the technology (if the gov. admits it or not) to put up a defense system. If we do such a thing, and it starts an arms race, the already poor countries are going to lose even more money, and therefore have even more motivation to put our defense system to the test. Now, suppose they are smarter than that, and they form an alliance against the US, similar to the weaker members of the "Survivor" group did to kick off the real survivors and give them a chance at the win. Just think if two countries like Russia and China, who already have little respect for the value of life (just look at those Nike plants in China) get together and decide they are going to go against the US. We may end up "winning," but what would we win? Half of the globe would be a smoldering pile of ashes and the other half would be suffering from all of the radiation and fallout. I voted for Bush and I think he's a good guy, and if he wanted to develop a global missle defense system that would shoot down any ICBM ever launched, then that would be a good plan. Making one only for the US just makes resentment from other countries higher, and pushes the limits of their temper, which alone is not so scary, but together, some of those countries could do some serious damage. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The way phone companies (most ISP's around here are subsidiaries of phone companies) are, we (the users) are going to get bent over and worked like a 2 dollar hoe one more time. I can't even begin to imagine all of the consequences of having such a system where only the paying ISP's get service to certain sites. This means that the ISP will decide for me what I get to use on the internet. This goes against all that is good with the net today. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sounds like a good case. Just throw in some techno-buzz words and the judge won't have a clue what you're talking about anyway. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's a valid question. It's a little like this: You suck. You want to sue someone to make money because you're mad that you suck. Napster has money. The individuals don't (well not much.) So sue Napster, and make money. That's the way I think it works. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You're confusing the issue. My point was that there was no change in the increase of music sales because of the mp3 "revolution." I beleive that the big wigs don't want these little upstart bands to be in the same system as their big name money makers, so they don't want things like Napster around. I was just saying they should revel in the free promotion. As for the Microsoft stuff, software and music are completely different things. It's not like Napster is selling people songs (well not yet anyway.) Oh and is this relevant? Well the whole case for Ulbitch is based on his accusation that Napster is hurting album sales, that is why they were originally fighting over an amount to pay for damages. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Don't these people realize that services like Napster actually increase their sales? Look at the recording industry and their numbers, I have seen no decrease. I have actually bought CD's based on songs heard from Napster downloads. Sure people can burn their own CD's with the MP3's, but rarely do you get the CD quality sound from a download. If they were to restrict anything, they should just restrict the sound quality. That way people would still need the real CD (even though it's already nearly impossible to find MP3's with CD quality.) Also, CD's that you burn are not as reliable as CD's that you buy. The pros have much better equipment than your 8X burner and they use much better CD's that don't scratch as easy, don't react with permanent marker ink, and generally last longer. I have issue with the fact that two meat heads like this Ulrich character and gangster Dr. Dre are deciding the future of online music. This really could be a great thing if people would just leave it alone and let it develop. Half of the music industry even says the same thing, they like the way Napster freely promotes their work. Of course this opens the door to an entirely new debate on how the promoters and studios don't want to lose control of how, when, and who they promote. But anyway, it's not like people won't still have ftp sites, or use audio galaxy, or gnutella, or mirc, or any of the other means to transfer files. This is a similar situation to the introduction of tape recorders and their ability to transfer music, and I think eventually the people who don't like it will just have to get over it. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I agree completely. Global Warming is just political hype. Environmentalists do have a lot to gain from interest in their subject, so they use scare tactics to get people's attention. I almost threw up when I watched the first few minutes of A.I. I'm not saying the oceans will never rise, but it's not going to happen in 20, 100, or 1000 years. The earth has cycles, that's just the way it is. "Save the Planet?" Shit, the planet is going to be OK, we're the ones who need the saving. Additionally, let's break down the Ozone debate. Scientists show time lapse pictures of the Ozone layer and how the "hole" is growing. Ozone is O3. Oxygen is O2. The sun's UV and other rays cause the O2 to break down and regroup as O3, in massive quantities. Now, Antartica... how much sun does that continent get? Not much. In fact, for 6 months it gets 0 sun. So, would you expect it to have any Ozone? Not if you have a brain. Why do you think the equator has extremely high levels of Ozone? OK, so people are getting skin cancer more these days... well no shit! There's a lot more people these days. People don't die of the common cold these days, so they live a lot longer and die of other diseases, LIKE SKIN CANCER! Also, people used to be in the sun because they had to be, it was work (some still do.) Nowadays people go lay in microwave tubes to burn their skin artificially. People put on lotions that cause an increase in "tanning." All of this ranting by me is to illustrate this: there is NOT NEARLY enough statistical evidence to prove that we as humans are harming the Ozone layer or causing Global Warming. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Slashdot Mirror
I think if people would just ask in a civil way for the opportunity to write a linux driver then HP would comply, because they don't want to lose customers, just like anybody else out there. Also did you try to use the configuration of an earlier version of the scanner? I know with printers that sometimes works... PS - What does that code mean in: "I'm talking about the 31337 h4x0r kids with the bad attitude"... I've seen it on this site before but I'm confused as to what it is, is it ROT-13 or something?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Well court TV does deal with real cases and real law at least. I was just making a joke though, no need for mean spirited remarks.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Now that's what I call intelligence. I wonder how much crack you can get for a laptop these days?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
For as long as he's a flight risk. It's at the judge's discretion, but the crime charged (different from the crime or lack of crime committed) is a hostile one, with a foreigner "attacking" an American company, and since the judge probably doesn't understand what's going on, he will be held without bail until either A) the trial starts, B) the trial is over, or C) his defense can pass a motion for his release on his own recognisance (spelling?).
:-)
Of course I only know that from watching Law and Order, so I could be wrong
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
``Really, what this is doing is companies are using the law to hide the fact that their security is bad,'' said Bruce Schneier, a cryptography expert and chief technology officer at Counterpane Internet Security, a computer network monitoring firm.
``The information for how to copy PDF files is being treated the same as lock picks and nuclear information,'' Schneier said.
Amen.
I think Adobe is just making a stink here, but there will be no real consequences for the nice Russian man. The have to prove malicious intent and since his software can only be used with purchased versions of PDF for making backup files, I don't think he's done anything illegal. Of course most people on a jury won't understand any of this, so I guess he has a chance of doing some time.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Anybody ever been to Stone Mountain in Atlanta, GA? They run the same show every night for months at a time, I bet they'd love some software like this to spice up the act relatively inexpensively.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
OK, so it was very noble of this person to point out the faults in the protection scheme so that others would know that their documents were not so safe after all...
However, if "these are people after all" in Adobe, then why would it be such a bad idea to present this to them first rather than just shoving the information out to the general public. I'm not saying to keep it from everyone, just give Adobe a heads up so that they can deal with it correctly and make their package better. Of course if Adobe says "ok now don't tell anyone," then I would say "kiss my ass, the people must know." Which would probably bring some legal action, however at least by telling them first you can prove no animosity towards the company, thus lessening the penalty or removing it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Haha, well I know it isn't much, but my point is that there are people out there who blindly will send in the $5 or whatever it is people ask for those programs.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
True, oh so true. You do lose some quality though, but I play stuff so loud I don't think my ears can tell any more.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hey, instead of messing up the quality of the songs, why don't they just issue licenses with each audio CD. If you want 5 copies, buy 5 licenses. I know I wouldn't pay the extra money, but there are people out there who would, just look at the money from shareware...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
OK, so we want protection against a "rouge" nation and their supposed nuclear arsenal... is that really what we want? I think Bush wants to start some new controversy, which he can hopefully come out of victoriously, as if he loses, we all die. Think about it this way: today, America is the richest country. We have the technology (if the gov. admits it or not) to put up a defense system. If we do such a thing, and it starts an arms race, the already poor countries are going to lose even more money, and therefore have even more motivation to put our defense system to the test. Now, suppose they are smarter than that, and they form an alliance against the US, similar to the weaker members of the "Survivor" group did to kick off the real survivors and give them a chance at the win. Just think if two countries like Russia and China, who already have little respect for the value of life (just look at those Nike plants in China) get together and decide they are going to go against the US. We may end up "winning," but what would we win? Half of the globe would be a smoldering pile of ashes and the other half would be suffering from all of the radiation and fallout. I voted for Bush and I think he's a good guy, and if he wanted to develop a global missle defense system that would shoot down any ICBM ever launched, then that would be a good plan. Making one only for the US just makes resentment from other countries higher, and pushes the limits of their temper, which alone is not so scary, but together, some of those countries could do some serious damage.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The way phone companies (most ISP's around here are subsidiaries of phone companies) are, we (the users) are going to get bent over and worked like a 2 dollar hoe one more time. I can't even begin to imagine all of the consequences of having such a system where only the paying ISP's get service to certain sites. This means that the ISP will decide for me what I get to use on the internet. This goes against all that is good with the net today.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sounds like a good case. Just throw in some techno-buzz words and the judge won't have a clue what you're talking about anyway.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's a valid question. It's a little like this: You suck. You want to sue someone to make money because you're mad that you suck. Napster has money. The individuals don't (well not much.) So sue Napster, and make money. That's the way I think it works.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You're confusing the issue. My point was that there was no change in the increase of music sales because of the mp3 "revolution." I beleive that the big wigs don't want these little upstart bands to be in the same system as their big name money makers, so they don't want things like Napster around. I was just saying they should revel in the free promotion. As for the Microsoft stuff, software and music are completely different things. It's not like Napster is selling people songs (well not yet anyway.) Oh and is this relevant? Well the whole case for Ulbitch is based on his accusation that Napster is hurting album sales, that is why they were originally fighting over an amount to pay for damages.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Don't these people realize that services like Napster actually increase their sales? Look at the recording industry and their numbers, I have seen no decrease. I have actually bought CD's based on songs heard from Napster downloads. Sure people can burn their own CD's with the MP3's, but rarely do you get the CD quality sound from a download. If they were to restrict anything, they should just restrict the sound quality. That way people would still need the real CD (even though it's already nearly impossible to find MP3's with CD quality.) Also, CD's that you burn are not as reliable as CD's that you buy. The pros have much better equipment than your 8X burner and they use much better CD's that don't scratch as easy, don't react with permanent marker ink, and generally last longer. I have issue with the fact that two meat heads like this Ulrich character and gangster Dr. Dre are deciding the future of online music. This really could be a great thing if people would just leave it alone and let it develop. Half of the music industry even says the same thing, they like the way Napster freely promotes their work. Of course this opens the door to an entirely new debate on how the promoters and studios don't want to lose control of how, when, and who they promote. But anyway, it's not like people won't still have ftp sites, or use audio galaxy, or gnutella, or mirc, or any of the other means to transfer files. This is a similar situation to the introduction of tape recorders and their ability to transfer music, and I think eventually the people who don't like it will just have to get over it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I agree completely. Global Warming is just political hype. Environmentalists do have a lot to gain from interest in their subject, so they use scare tactics to get people's attention. I almost threw up when I watched the first few minutes of A.I. I'm not saying the oceans will never rise, but it's not going to happen in 20, 100, or 1000 years. The earth has cycles, that's just the way it is. "Save the Planet?" Shit, the planet is going to be OK, we're the ones who need the saving. Additionally, let's break down the Ozone debate. Scientists show time lapse pictures of the Ozone layer and how the "hole" is growing. Ozone is O3. Oxygen is O2. The sun's UV and other rays cause the O2 to break down and regroup as O3, in massive quantities. Now, Antartica... how much sun does that continent get? Not much. In fact, for 6 months it gets 0 sun. So, would you expect it to have any Ozone? Not if you have a brain. Why do you think the equator has extremely high levels of Ozone? OK, so people are getting skin cancer more these days... well no shit! There's a lot more people these days. People don't die of the common cold these days, so they live a lot longer and die of other diseases, LIKE SKIN CANCER! Also, people used to be in the sun because they had to be, it was work (some still do.) Nowadays people go lay in microwave tubes to burn their skin artificially. People put on lotions that cause an increase in "tanning." All of this ranting by me is to illustrate this: there is NOT NEARLY enough statistical evidence to prove that we as humans are harming the Ozone layer or causing Global Warming.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~