The reason that there is a broad push for this kind of technology (intrusive content control) is that the current federal administration is very much pro big business.
Ahhh.... I was WONDERING why this whole trend only started six months ago, instead of three years ago...
Somebody busted his hump to get his boss at NSA to let him work on Linux. Said person then busted his hump even further to get his boss to actually allow the release of the source code. What, you think it was easy to get the NSA to release the source code?
I can only imagine how many levels of authorization this poor guy had to go through to get permission to release the source code. Can you even begin to imagine the hell he went through for our benefit?
And as his reward, this poor soul now gets a bunch of idiots screaming about the NSA trying to break Linux's security. If he ever gets invited to speak at a conference, he'll probably be booed off the stage for his efforts.
Doesn't anybody think before going into hysterics?
But why don't we get the source code to the client? This would alleviate one concern right away, in that we'd be able to check what kinds of work are being done.
Before branding me a source code zealot, ask yourself this simple question: why aren't they releasing the source? Because it's proprietary? Erm... I thought they were claiming to be not for profit, and philanthropic. What, is a non-profit worried about "competitive advantage?" Or is this non-profit planning on selling the program for a profit at a later date? Something doesn't add up here. Philanthropic endeavors are generally based on cooperation, and closed source is nothing but competitive.
I'd like to believe all of the protestations of innocence, but it's a little too sketchy. If they're truly philanthropic, they should have nothing to hide.
And the way they spin "publication", intimating that all of humanity will benefit from the findings, all the while conveniently ignoring the issue of about patents and other use rights.
And what's with the lack of disclosure here? Wouldn't it be in simple good taste to disclose that United Devices is a for profit company?
I'd love to believe them, and I'd love to participate in a project like this, but there are just too many small things that add up to say "you're being deceived."
Reading this, it becomes clear that the social "revolution"...
I hate to sound like Katz...
I had to laugh when I got to the second paragraph. Before I'd even finished the first sentence in the post, I'd checked the poster's name to see if it was Katz, and briefly toyed with the idea that it might be Katz writing under a pseudonym.
I'm not criticizing the post. I just find it amusing that slashdotters are developing an extreme (if not allergic) reflex to the words "social revolution."
You don't see the local knitting guild or mall-walkers' club investing in a supercomputer. You see them investing in a robust NT-server/WinME-client setup.
Ah, yes, the knitting guild. You young whippersnapper wouldn't remember back in the day, when every knitting guild worth its salt had at least a mainframe, and the big 'uns had supercomputer or two.
Makes me feel young just thinking about it.
Nowadays, uh-course, the knitting guilds are all run by youngsters, with their newfangled WinNT clusters and WinMe clients.
As for large corporate installations, this has the potential to cut costs a great deal. The tech people would not need to hassle with opening up cases; instead, just plug cord in, insert driver disk, and job done.
Has anyone had any experience with peripherals "disappearing" in these kind of situations? It's hard for an entire PC to go missing, but an external hard drive is definitely briefcase-able.
I'd like to think that such things don't happen, but...
You know, I don't honestly care what doodads and fancy schmancy stuff it has on it. I just want (finally) a version of Windows that I can put on my grandmother's computer and have it work for her without crashing or otherwise continually boogering up.
Honestly, I don't really care about the new features in Windows XP, or whether or not they appeal to me. It doesn't matter- I'll never run Windows as a primary OS again. I've rediscovered the joys of an industrial strength OS, and I'm not going back to a toy OS no matter how bright and shiney it is. But that's ok, because I'm just not the right target audience.
I find that I still care about the new Windows because I'd still like to see MS release a good, stable version of Windows so that it becomes easier for me to support friends and family. Dumb it down all you want, print the manual on drool proof paper, whatever, just produce something that (finally!) works consistently, so that I don't get all the phone calls about how Windows won't shut down, won't boot, crashes every two minutes, doesn't work right since I installed this software, etc, etc, etc, ad nauseum.
I've honestly contemplated setting up friends and family with Linux and just giving them a user account (i.e. I keep root) so that it's easier to support them. But it would be even easier if MS (finally! Bloody finally!) released an OS stable enough for daily use by a casual user.
IANAL, but if a group of companies cooperates to create a system that reduces consumer choice, and each agrees in advance not to do anything that would break this system (even if a situation arises that would cause such an action to be to that particular company's advantage), isn't that pretty much a textbook case of an antitrust violation?
In my experience, if you want to see your lawyer fidget, just mumble something in his presence about making a deal with another company (even one that's not a competitor). Most lawyers seem to regard antitrust issues as heavy wizardry.
One way to handle this would be to pull a Microsoft on Microsoft. Emulate (embrace) DirectX and then extend its functionality in a way that appeals to game developers. Perhaps some easy to use calls that tie more directly into Linux, for improved speed. Developers still get to code to only one API, but they also have an opportunity to use one or two "special" calls to improve performance under Linux.
Over the course of time, as more and more of these special functions are added, developers will find that they are doing more and more stuff that is specific to Linux. Not because they have to, but because it improves performance and gives them a higher framerate in the Linux benchmarks.
In the fullness of time, they might find themselves stepping entirely away from DirectX on Linux and moving to the GNU DirectLinux API. Purely for performance reasons, of course, and because they've already got enough Linux-specific code that this is just one more small step.
From there it's only a short step to coding a port entirely for Linux.
Companies are notoriously short sighted. Appealing to them to make a radical change because it will benefit them in the long term is a pointless endeavor. Instead, give them 50 small changes, each with definite short term benefits, that when taken together arrive at the same place as the one radical change.
Wyoming Gov. Jim Gerringer, a Republican, speaking in part as an emissary from the National Governors' Association, asked the committee for cooperation and partnership, saying -- as an
example -- that a state such as his own suffers immeasurably from the loss of potential revenue.
Ah yes... the immeasurable loss we suffer because we don't tax the sales of the online merchant princes of Wyoming.
I'd also like something that would handle digital audio as well...
Be careful about trying to use SmartMedia in both camera and audio applications. There are a number of audio devices that reformat SmartMedia in such a manner that cameras can't use it. At all. They can't even reformat it back to a camera friendly format. Many a poor soul has ended up stuck with a SmartMedia card that only works in their MP3 player.
Some manufacturers have released programs that employ a PC's SmartMedia drive to reformat the media into a camera friendly format, but it's something you'll want to look into before you stick that 64MB SmartMedia card in your MP3 player.
At the moment, I've only heard of this affecting SmartMedia. Nonetheless, it might pay to investigate before putting a CompactFlash into a digital audio device.
Slashdot Mirror
The reason that there is a broad push for this kind of technology (intrusive content control) is that the current federal administration is very much pro big business.
Ahhh.... I was WONDERING why this whole trend only started six months ago, instead of three years ago...
Here's the timeline
The development toolkit was released in February. What they're releasing now is the database kernel.
Great, another round of NSA hysterics.
You know what the saddest thing is about this?
Somebody busted his hump to get his boss at NSA to let him work on Linux. Said person then busted his hump even further to get his boss to actually allow the release of the source code. What, you think it was easy to get the NSA to release the source code?
I can only imagine how many levels of authorization this poor guy had to go through to get permission to release the source code. Can you even begin to imagine the hell he went through for our benefit?
And as his reward, this poor soul now gets a bunch of idiots screaming about the NSA trying to break Linux's security. If he ever gets invited to speak at a conference, he'll probably be booed off the stage for his efforts.
Doesn't anybody think before going into hysterics?
But why don't we get the source code to the client? This would alleviate one concern right away, in that we'd be able to check what kinds of work are being done.
Before branding me a source code zealot, ask yourself this simple question: why aren't they releasing the source? Because it's proprietary? Erm... I thought they were claiming to be not for profit, and philanthropic. What, is a non-profit worried about "competitive advantage?" Or is this non-profit planning on selling the program for a profit at a later date? Something doesn't add up here. Philanthropic endeavors are generally based on cooperation, and closed source is nothing but competitive.
I'd like to believe all of the protestations of innocence, but it's a little too sketchy. If they're truly philanthropic, they should have nothing to hide.
And the way they spin "publication", intimating that all of humanity will benefit from the findings, all the while conveniently ignoring the issue of about patents and other use rights.
And what's with the lack of disclosure here? Wouldn't it be in simple good taste to disclose that United Devices is a for profit company?
I'd love to believe them, and I'd love to participate in a project like this, but there are just too many small things that add up to say "you're being deceived."
Now THAT is class. Someone who takes April 1 so seriously that they even redo their banner ads.
Funniest stuff I've seen or heard all day.
Let's generate power from goat sex!
You know it's been a boring day on slashdot when that gets moderated "Interesting."
Not "Funny", no, no, that's "Interesting."
Yowch.
Maaaake ittt stoooooooooppppp!!!!!
Is it tomorrow yet?
Taco: Hemos, you won't believe the April Fools joke I just pulled.
Hemos: Do tell, do tell.
Taco: I've secretly replaced Jamie's Prozac with dark, sparkling Folger's crystals. Let's watch and see what happens...
How would Slashdot function during a war
For some reason, this makes me think ofkremvax.
Reading this, it becomes clear that the social "revolution"...
I hate to sound like Katz...
I had to laugh when I got to the second paragraph. Before I'd even finished the first sentence in the post, I'd checked the poster's name to see if it was Katz, and briefly toyed with the idea that it might be Katz writing under a pseudonym.
I'm not criticizing the post. I just find it amusing that slashdotters are developing an extreme (if not allergic) reflex to the words "social revolution."
You don't see the local knitting guild or mall-walkers' club investing in a supercomputer. You see them investing in a robust NT-server/WinME-client setup.
Ah, yes, the knitting guild. You young whippersnapper wouldn't remember back in the day, when every knitting guild worth its salt had at least a mainframe, and the big 'uns had supercomputer or two.
Makes me feel young just thinking about it.
Nowadays, uh-course, the knitting guilds are all run by youngsters, with their newfangled WinNT clusters and WinMe clients.
Man, we gotta get a rating of "-1 WTF?".
Imagine a beo... Oh, screw it.
Ya gotta love it when someone quotes the press release verbatim and it gets modded "funny."
Over the last week there have been unsuccessful attempts made to hack into DoubleClick's servers. Those situations were immediately corrected
What, so they called the crackers and showed them how to do it right?
As for large corporate installations, this has the potential to cut costs a great deal. The tech people would not need to hassle with opening up cases; instead, just plug cord in, insert driver disk, and job done.
Has anyone had any experience with peripherals "disappearing" in these kind of situations? It's hard for an entire PC to go missing, but an external hard drive is definitely briefcase-able.
I'd like to think that such things don't happen, but...
You know, I don't honestly care what doodads and fancy schmancy stuff it has on it. I just want (finally) a version of Windows that I can put on my grandmother's computer and have it work for her without crashing or otherwise continually boogering up.
Honestly, I don't really care about the new features in Windows XP, or whether or not they appeal to me. It doesn't matter- I'll never run Windows as a primary OS again. I've rediscovered the joys of an industrial strength OS, and I'm not going back to a toy OS no matter how bright and shiney it is. But that's ok, because I'm just not the right target audience.
I find that I still care about the new Windows because I'd still like to see MS release a good, stable version of Windows so that it becomes easier for me to support friends and family. Dumb it down all you want, print the manual on drool proof paper, whatever, just produce something that (finally!) works consistently, so that I don't get all the phone calls about how Windows won't shut down, won't boot, crashes every two minutes, doesn't work right since I installed this software, etc, etc, etc, ad nauseum.
I've honestly contemplated setting up friends and family with Linux and just giving them a user account (i.e. I keep root) so that it's easier to support them. But it would be even easier if MS (finally! Bloody finally!) released an OS stable enough for daily use by a casual user.
IANAL, but if a group of companies cooperates to create a system that reduces consumer choice, and each agrees in advance not to do anything that would break this system (even if a situation arises that would cause such an action to be to that particular company's advantage), isn't that pretty much a textbook case of an antitrust violation?
In my experience, if you want to see your lawyer fidget, just mumble something in his presence about making a deal with another company (even one that's not a competitor). Most lawyers seem to regard antitrust issues as heavy wizardry.
One way to handle this would be to pull a Microsoft on Microsoft. Emulate (embrace) DirectX and then extend its functionality in a way that appeals to game developers. Perhaps some easy to use calls that tie more directly into Linux, for improved speed. Developers still get to code to only one API, but they also have an opportunity to use one or two "special" calls to improve performance under Linux.
Over the course of time, as more and more of these special functions are added, developers will find that they are doing more and more stuff that is specific to Linux. Not because they have to, but because it improves performance and gives them a higher framerate in the Linux benchmarks.
In the fullness of time, they might find themselves stepping entirely away from DirectX on Linux and moving to the GNU DirectLinux API. Purely for performance reasons, of course, and because they've already got enough Linux-specific code that this is just one more small step.
From there it's only a short step to coding a port entirely for Linux.
Companies are notoriously short sighted. Appealing to them to make a radical change because it will benefit them in the long term is a pointless endeavor. Instead, give them 50 small changes, each with definite short term benefits, that when taken together arrive at the same place as the one radical change.
This was one of the original promises of cable TV. Unfortunately, it didn't last long. Now we pay for cable and get ads as a free bonus.
On the other hand, I suspect that the original poster had this in mind and is trying to gently teach us about the future of such services on the net.
Wyoming Gov. Jim Gerringer, a Republican, speaking in part as an emissary from the National Governors' Association, asked the committee for cooperation and partnership, saying -- as an example -- that a state such as his own suffers immeasurably from the loss of potential revenue.
Ah yes... the immeasurable loss we suffer because we don't tax the sales of the online merchant princes of Wyoming.
I'd also like something that would handle digital audio as well...
Be careful about trying to use SmartMedia in both camera and audio applications. There are a number of audio devices that reformat SmartMedia in such a manner that cameras can't use it. At all. They can't even reformat it back to a camera friendly format. Many a poor soul has ended up stuck with a SmartMedia card that only works in their MP3 player.
Some manufacturers have released programs that employ a PC's SmartMedia drive to reformat the media into a camera friendly format, but it's something you'll want to look into before you stick that 64MB SmartMedia card in your MP3 player.
At the moment, I've only heard of this affecting SmartMedia. Nonetheless, it might pay to investigate before putting a CompactFlash into a digital audio device.