It is not the numbers themselves, but the arrangement of those numbers that is copyrighted. The same logic applies to a book (or even your essay on how you discovered that un-copyrightable Mersenne prime). The components of the book (words, letters, symbols) are not copyrightable but the specific arrangement of thousands of those words into a book certainly are. Words, symbols, numbers, a graph of a mathematical function are all trivial and cannot be copyrighted, but putting all of those together in a particular manner creates something far more unique and meaningful than the individual bits.
If you want to extend your analogy to its logical conclusion, ALL things are made up of atoms and all of those are made of subatomic particles, none of which can be copyrighted, so by your proposed standard literally nothing can ever be copyrighted because all things are made up of subatomic particles.
They have done this before and it was quite successful...and quite humiliating for the people that tried to put Google into a bent-over position. It's a classic case of someone's hubris blinding them to reality; they need Google a LOT more than Google needs them.
To use an analogy (those always work well, ha) there's a huge difference between saying "this is how pipe bombs are constructed" and "we encourage you to use pipe bombs on people" but linking isn't even that; linking is "here is where you can find a page that tells you how pipe bombs are constructed." To put it another way, it's the difference between giving someone a drug dealer's number and actually dealing drugs. It is insane to consider linking "copyright infringement" especially since the place linked to is completely out of control of the linking party. This song and dance has been played out before.
"Don't buy hardware that doesn't adhere to established, working standards, like a 3.5mm jack."
Fixed that a bit for you. For audio, especially audio on consumer playback devices, USB and Lightning are NOT "established working standards." 1/8-inch jacks have been the only standard for these things for many decades while 1/4-inch has been standard for headphones on hi-fi decks for longer than that. There is no need to reinvent this wheel. Wired headphones for portable use should have a 1/8-inch (3.5mm) jack, end of story. Any wired headphones that don't should be disregarded. Vote with your wallet against this crap.
YouTube sends you a check (literally, they mail you a physical check, can't possibly cost more than $0.50 a pop total) at each $100 of revenue earned. Checks are not credit cards, so they don't have credit card transaction fees. Patreon's crap attempt at financial sleight of hand is crappy but has no relation to YouTube's crappy changes except that it's an obvious cash grab. I can almost guarantee that they'll still run some ads on videos that aren't ad-enabled. I've seen it many times. They go "not suitable for ads, so you can't have any money" then run some ads anyway. After all, I don't think Grammarly or Wix or Squarespace consider a bigot's dollar to be worth less than a saint's, and this lets Google hang on to 100% of the ad dollars instead of having to share any of it with smaller creators. It's yet another cash grab by YouTube.
The biggest "thrift store" near me has some really expensive crap. They try to sell 10-year-old couches in great visual condition but with hideous colors for $250 with a brand new furniture store right across the street. I think DVDs are a few dollars a pop. Furniture and electronics are both insanely priced. Prices are non-negotiable. It amazes me that anyone bothers with the place. The only thing appropriately priced is VHS tapes. It doesn't matter how many used clothes you donate if they end up being priced as if they were new at the "thrift store." It doubly kills me because they get the damned stuff 100% for free. Lots of people are annoyed at how the place is being run.
The brake must be applied to change gears, INCLUDING to change into park when stopped. The gear change indication is not moved by bumping the lever (this would make a lot of sense to me, Park could be selected by frantically bumping forward several times if in doubt) but instead by just holding and waiting for the bold or illuminated letter to move to the desired gear. The shifter moves back to the center position when you let it go. The tactile feedback is deceptive to the user, especially to a user that is used to the manual and automatic transmission controls used in vehicles for many decades prior to this "innovation." Even in cars with automated transmission control where the lever is just an electronic input to the car's engine control unit, they STILL use locking positions for the lever for very good reasons.
I want to know if you can shift to neutral from drive on this thing without applying the brake. If not, that's a serious safety risk too; if the engine were to malfunction or start uncontrollably accelerating, the fastest thing to do to separate it from the wheels and maintain control of the vehicle is to slam it into neutral. It doesn't seem like this design allows that. Removing physical linkages can have benefits but then a bad decision by some C programmer somewhere can end up getting you injured or killed. There is a reason I don't own anything with an automatic transmission anymore.
I'd just like to point out that user interface design changes for no good reason other than change's sake resulted in the death of Chekov's actor, Anton Yelchin. While Snapchat's UI is unlikely to result in death, the point remains the same: once users buy into an interface and grow the skill set to use it well, you can't shake it up in any major way without causing serious problems and pissing off a lot of people. Microsoft made a major change in Office 2007 with the "ribbon" that user testing indicated was necessary and was successful in reducing hunting and whatnot, yet that stupid ass ribbon and the shuffling of formatting options to hidden places without decent discoverability is still an enormous pain in the ass for me to use even today. It used to be that I could right-click on text and get paragraph and character formatting boxes with everything but the kitchen sink in them organized into wonderfully neat hierarchical tabs. Now every time I want to do something that doesn't start with B/I/U I have to go on an Easter egg hunt.
Changing user interfaces willy-nilly kills well-known actors and pisses off millions of teenagers. Don't do it.
It won't happen. I have tons of devices that do encryption without law enforcement backdoor weakening or key escrow. In the worst case I can easily implement my own, with soldered-together transistors or a wall of abacuses if I really had to. It will be very hard for them to force us to use their compromised-by-definition encryption ideas and making encryption illegal would burn the modern internet to the ground.
Revealing an encryption password in your head is testimony and forcing that disclosure violates the Fifth Amendment; never mind other issues such as if the person legitimately forgot the password and so has no password to hand over. So yes, for encryption it works that way. I have yet to see anything to the contrary in the US.
Also, there is absolutely nothing I have ever seen anywhere that says you must hand over the keys to your house if someone has a search warrant. You may choose to do so instead of having them bust down your door, but a search warrant cannot be used to force you to assist the police in executing it, nor should it be. Note that you even said "the police can do what they want with a warrant" which is not the same thing as the police forcibly conscripting the subject whose effects are being searched to assist in the search in any way.
Are you in the legal profession? If so, and I'm wrong, I'd like some citations that point to the case law or statutory language that makes it so. It would be appreciated.
You have the legal authority to pry them open. Get prying. Having the authority to try to open something doesn't give you the entitlement to open it. Unfortunately, it seems the top dog at the FBI does not understand this concept. It's also entirely the fault of the FBI and other government agencies with police powers that this encryption situation has gone in this direction. They made this bed and they must lie in it. No law can change the fundamental properties of mathematical operations, and good luck outlawing consumer encryption since every CPU being made nowadays (even Celerons and Atoms) has hardware AES and such strong encryption is ubiquitous. Combined with the epic failure and subsequent revelations of major flaws in the government's key escrow Clipper Chip, there is no way the FBI is killing off the spread of encryption.
Windows 10 re-enables wuauserv behind your back. It has happened to me on multiple systems numerous times. The only solution is to delete it so there's nothing there to re-enable, but deleting it without backing it up makes it impossible to get updates when you actually want them. I disabled it in services.msc many, many times only to find my computer rebooted and more than one overnight 4K video renders interrupted and output destroyed and time wasted because of this crap.
I don't recommend the reg-based on/off switch willy-nilly. It is an aggressive workaround to block a hostile override tactic by Microsoft.
Wow, what an asshole you are. Maybe if you used your brain instead of your "insert dickbag remarks here" key on your keyboard you'd actually understand what's going on. Windows 10 has re-enabled the Windows Update service and updated and rebooted overnight on me several times despite going back into services.msc and disabling it every time so I can control when I do my updates. If they export the wuauserv key to one reg file and make another reg file with my text above, they now have an "on" and "off" switch for the service that effectively blocks Windows 10's automatic re-enabling of wuauserv.
So, you fucking simpleton who has nothing better to do than pretend you know more than everyone else, there is both a technical issue and a functional solution presented that you were too stupid or stubborn to understand, so you lashed out like an overwhelmed child which really accomplished a lot. Congratulations, you're a low-skill moron with severe Dunning-Kruger problems. At least you posted as AC so no one knows who you are and you can go sulk in a corner without being disturbed.
Run your export to restore the Windows Update service. Run this one to remove it again. Once the updates want to reboot you can remove wuauserv because that has nothing to do with the actual update installation at that point.
I noticed the bricking reports cropping up like crazy. At the end of the last video I made about this CPU bug fiasco and the bricking reports all over MS Answers I walked away saying "now if you'll excuse me, I have to turn off the Windows Update service on all my computers" and after a few seconds of outro I dropped in a joke cut saying "JUST KIDDING ALL MY STUFF RUNS AMD, HAHAHA!"
Looks like I narrowly averted disaster though. I am glad that my WU humor was not entirely a joke and the Win10 stuff I have all has HKLM\CCS\services\wuauserv normally deleted and restored when I manually decide to allow updates to happen. I don't have time to reinstall everything from scratch at the start of a new year. If After Effects ran on Linux then I'd probably stop using Windows entirely at this point. There is no excuse for a "security update" murdering the entire OS and the incompetence shown throughout this whole Spectre/Meltdown thing by several big players is pretty paranoia-worthy stuff. It's especially troublesome because Win10 Pro actually IGNORES ALL of the system policies that prevent updates from happening automatically behind your back and prevent automatic rebooting for updates while users are logged on. AMD owners are forced to let their computers commit suicide.
Given this gross incompetence from Microsoft plus the nVidia datacenter hostility, maybe this will be The Year Of Desktop Linux(tm). Somehow I doubt it.
A recall of every CPU since 2006 would decimate (if the recall isn't heavily utilized) or likely even bankrupt Intel. The Core 2 generation is the oldest practical Intel CPU (yes, I know this is a subjective statement, thus "practical") on which you can run Windows 10 and modern software. Every computer running Windows 10 and an Intel chip would need CPU replacement. We are talking quite literally several billion processors since Intel sells a few hundred million per year. Intel's market cap is over 200 billion dollars, but even if they were expected to replace 1 billion $100 processors that's half of the company's value. Since we're talking about 11 years worth of processors there is potential for the number to be more like 3-4 billion processors. This is purely the financial side and ignores all of the logistics which would be a totally separate nightmare. Intel is incapable of manufacturing anywhere close to that many processors in a year ESPECIALLY if they continue to sell new processors while doing the recall.
Intel simply cannot afford to recall all affected processors. Do not expect it to happen because it won't. They will obscurity-by-corporate-speak their way out of this in a way that could make Enron's obfuscated lies look tame. If there were no software mitigation they would have few straws to grasp at, but the OS workarounds give them a tiny escape door and you better believe that they'll hire a whole crew of bulldozers to force this massve elephant through it.
Microcode can change a lot of things about a processor, but microcode generally works by "pulling a bunch of strings" in the CPU control unit in a particular order for each CPU instruction encountered. Those "strings" go to a bunch of complex hard-wired circuits that can never be changed. I seriously doubt that the characteristics of the CPU TLB can be changed with a simple microcode update.
No, we don't know. You can hand-wave all you want with terms like "denialist" despite a lack of denial on my part (do you even know what the words you use mean?) but you have far less logic behind your position than I do; all you've really said is "authority; physics!" while ignoring all that I say which is contrary and logical yet inconvenient to your position. You say "weather isn't climate...climate is weather" unironically and lob insults at me as if that somehow supports your position.
Go back to 4chan, troll. I'm long past done feeding you.
I'd mod you up if I had mod points. I've noticed plenty of unusually worded Intel-AMD equivocation comments across a variety of tech forums since this broke and it doesn't smell right for "Intel fanboys," it just smells like shilling.
This has become pitiful. You're just spinning in fallacious circles and even destroying your own arguments immediately after making them. The conversation is over on my side. I'll let the readers think what they wish, but this will clearly go nowhere from here. Feel free to continue replying into the ether if you want.
Slashdot Mirror
It is not the numbers themselves, but the arrangement of those numbers that is copyrighted. The same logic applies to a book (or even your essay on how you discovered that un-copyrightable Mersenne prime). The components of the book (words, letters, symbols) are not copyrightable but the specific arrangement of thousands of those words into a book certainly are. Words, symbols, numbers, a graph of a mathematical function are all trivial and cannot be copyrighted, but putting all of those together in a particular manner creates something far more unique and meaningful than the individual bits.
If you want to extend your analogy to its logical conclusion, ALL things are made up of atoms and all of those are made of subatomic particles, none of which can be copyrighted, so by your proposed standard literally nothing can ever be copyrighted because all things are made up of subatomic particles.
I hope that was helpful.
They have done this before and it was quite successful...and quite humiliating for the people that tried to put Google into a bent-over position. It's a classic case of someone's hubris blinding them to reality; they need Google a LOT more than Google needs them.
To use an analogy (those always work well, ha) there's a huge difference between saying "this is how pipe bombs are constructed" and "we encourage you to use pipe bombs on people" but linking isn't even that; linking is "here is where you can find a page that tells you how pipe bombs are constructed." To put it another way, it's the difference between giving someone a drug dealer's number and actually dealing drugs. It is insane to consider linking "copyright infringement" especially since the place linked to is completely out of control of the linking party. This song and dance has been played out before.
"Don't buy hardware that doesn't adhere to established, working standards, like a 3.5mm jack."
Fixed that a bit for you. For audio, especially audio on consumer playback devices, USB and Lightning are NOT "established working standards." 1/8-inch jacks have been the only standard for these things for many decades while 1/4-inch has been standard for headphones on hi-fi decks for longer than that. There is no need to reinvent this wheel. Wired headphones for portable use should have a 1/8-inch (3.5mm) jack, end of story. Any wired headphones that don't should be disregarded. Vote with your wallet against this crap.
YouTube sends you a check (literally, they mail you a physical check, can't possibly cost more than $0.50 a pop total) at each $100 of revenue earned. Checks are not credit cards, so they don't have credit card transaction fees. Patreon's crap attempt at financial sleight of hand is crappy but has no relation to YouTube's crappy changes except that it's an obvious cash grab. I can almost guarantee that they'll still run some ads on videos that aren't ad-enabled. I've seen it many times. They go "not suitable for ads, so you can't have any money" then run some ads anyway. After all, I don't think Grammarly or Wix or Squarespace consider a bigot's dollar to be worth less than a saint's, and this lets Google hang on to 100% of the ad dollars instead of having to share any of it with smaller creators. It's yet another cash grab by YouTube.
The biggest "thrift store" near me has some really expensive crap. They try to sell 10-year-old couches in great visual condition but with hideous colors for $250 with a brand new furniture store right across the street. I think DVDs are a few dollars a pop. Furniture and electronics are both insanely priced. Prices are non-negotiable. It amazes me that anyone bothers with the place. The only thing appropriately priced is VHS tapes. It doesn't matter how many used clothes you donate if they end up being priced as if they were new at the "thrift store." It doubly kills me because they get the damned stuff 100% for free. Lots of people are annoyed at how the place is being run.
It was a terrible user interface design that did not provide accurate feedback to the user. In the case of Chrysler's new shifter, it was difficult to know when the vehicle was in "park" and this was especially bad because the shifter is a handle that strongly resembles a standard shifter. Check out the video from Mopar about how to use it.
The brake must be applied to change gears, INCLUDING to change into park when stopped. The gear change indication is not moved by bumping the lever (this would make a lot of sense to me, Park could be selected by frantically bumping forward several times if in doubt) but instead by just holding and waiting for the bold or illuminated letter to move to the desired gear. The shifter moves back to the center position when you let it go. The tactile feedback is deceptive to the user, especially to a user that is used to the manual and automatic transmission controls used in vehicles for many decades prior to this "innovation." Even in cars with automated transmission control where the lever is just an electronic input to the car's engine control unit, they STILL use locking positions for the lever for very good reasons.
I want to know if you can shift to neutral from drive on this thing without applying the brake. If not, that's a serious safety risk too; if the engine were to malfunction or start uncontrollably accelerating, the fastest thing to do to separate it from the wheels and maintain control of the vehicle is to slam it into neutral. It doesn't seem like this design allows that. Removing physical linkages can have benefits but then a bad decision by some C programmer somewhere can end up getting you injured or killed. There is a reason I don't own anything with an automatic transmission anymore.
I'd just like to point out that user interface design changes for no good reason other than change's sake resulted in the death of Chekov's actor, Anton Yelchin. While Snapchat's UI is unlikely to result in death, the point remains the same: once users buy into an interface and grow the skill set to use it well, you can't shake it up in any major way without causing serious problems and pissing off a lot of people. Microsoft made a major change in Office 2007 with the "ribbon" that user testing indicated was necessary and was successful in reducing hunting and whatnot, yet that stupid ass ribbon and the shuffling of formatting options to hidden places without decent discoverability is still an enormous pain in the ass for me to use even today. It used to be that I could right-click on text and get paragraph and character formatting boxes with everything but the kitchen sink in them organized into wonderfully neat hierarchical tabs. Now every time I want to do something that doesn't start with B/I/U I have to go on an Easter egg hunt.
Changing user interfaces willy-nilly kills well-known actors and pisses off millions of teenagers. Don't do it.
It won't happen. I have tons of devices that do encryption without law enforcement backdoor weakening or key escrow. In the worst case I can easily implement my own, with soldered-together transistors or a wall of abacuses if I really had to. It will be very hard for them to force us to use their compromised-by-definition encryption ideas and making encryption illegal would burn the modern internet to the ground.
Revealing an encryption password in your head is testimony and forcing that disclosure violates the Fifth Amendment; never mind other issues such as if the person legitimately forgot the password and so has no password to hand over. So yes, for encryption it works that way. I have yet to see anything to the contrary in the US.
Also, there is absolutely nothing I have ever seen anywhere that says you must hand over the keys to your house if someone has a search warrant. You may choose to do so instead of having them bust down your door, but a search warrant cannot be used to force you to assist the police in executing it, nor should it be. Note that you even said "the police can do what they want with a warrant" which is not the same thing as the police forcibly conscripting the subject whose effects are being searched to assist in the search in any way.
Are you in the legal profession? If so, and I'm wrong, I'd like some citations that point to the case law or statutory language that makes it so. It would be appreciated.
You have the legal authority to pry them open. Get prying. Having the authority to try to open something doesn't give you the entitlement to open it. Unfortunately, it seems the top dog at the FBI does not understand this concept. It's also entirely the fault of the FBI and other government agencies with police powers that this encryption situation has gone in this direction. They made this bed and they must lie in it. No law can change the fundamental properties of mathematical operations, and good luck outlawing consumer encryption since every CPU being made nowadays (even Celerons and Atoms) has hardware AES and such strong encryption is ubiquitous. Combined with the epic failure and subsequent revelations of major flaws in the government's key escrow Clipper Chip, there is no way the FBI is killing off the spread of encryption.
Windows 10 re-enables wuauserv behind your back. It has happened to me on multiple systems numerous times. The only solution is to delete it so there's nothing there to re-enable, but deleting it without backing it up makes it impossible to get updates when you actually want them. I disabled it in services.msc many, many times only to find my computer rebooted and more than one overnight 4K video renders interrupted and output destroyed and time wasted because of this crap.
I don't recommend the reg-based on/off switch willy-nilly. It is an aggressive workaround to block a hostile override tactic by Microsoft.
Wow, what an asshole you are. Maybe if you used your brain instead of your "insert dickbag remarks here" key on your keyboard you'd actually understand what's going on. Windows 10 has re-enabled the Windows Update service and updated and rebooted overnight on me several times despite going back into services.msc and disabling it every time so I can control when I do my updates. If they export the wuauserv key to one reg file and make another reg file with my text above, they now have an "on" and "off" switch for the service that effectively blocks Windows 10's automatic re-enabling of wuauserv.
So, you fucking simpleton who has nothing better to do than pretend you know more than everyone else, there is both a technical issue and a functional solution presented that you were too stupid or stubborn to understand, so you lashed out like an overwhelmed child which really accomplished a lot. Congratulations, you're a low-skill moron with severe Dunning-Kruger problems. At least you posted as AC so no one knows who you are and you can go sulk in a corner without being disturbed.
486 processors.
If I could do it, I'd mod you up to 11 for that one.
Go to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services and export the wuauserv key to a reg file. Then import this reg file:
Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00
[-HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\wuauserv]
Run your export to restore the Windows Update service. Run this one to remove it again. Once the updates want to reboot you can remove wuauserv because that has nothing to do with the actual update installation at that point.
I noticed the bricking reports cropping up like crazy. At the end of the last video I made about this CPU bug fiasco and the bricking reports all over MS Answers I walked away saying "now if you'll excuse me, I have to turn off the Windows Update service on all my computers" and after a few seconds of outro I dropped in a joke cut saying "JUST KIDDING ALL MY STUFF RUNS AMD, HAHAHA!"
Looks like I narrowly averted disaster though. I am glad that my WU humor was not entirely a joke and the Win10 stuff I have all has HKLM\CCS\services\wuauserv normally deleted and restored when I manually decide to allow updates to happen. I don't have time to reinstall everything from scratch at the start of a new year. If After Effects ran on Linux then I'd probably stop using Windows entirely at this point. There is no excuse for a "security update" murdering the entire OS and the incompetence shown throughout this whole Spectre/Meltdown thing by several big players is pretty paranoia-worthy stuff. It's especially troublesome because Win10 Pro actually IGNORES ALL of the system policies that prevent updates from happening automatically behind your back and prevent automatic rebooting for updates while users are logged on. AMD owners are forced to let their computers commit suicide.
Given this gross incompetence from Microsoft plus the nVidia datacenter hostility, maybe this will be The Year Of Desktop Linux(tm). Somehow I doubt it.
A recall of every CPU since 2006 would decimate (if the recall isn't heavily utilized) or likely even bankrupt Intel. The Core 2 generation is the oldest practical Intel CPU (yes, I know this is a subjective statement, thus "practical") on which you can run Windows 10 and modern software. Every computer running Windows 10 and an Intel chip would need CPU replacement. We are talking quite literally several billion processors since Intel sells a few hundred million per year. Intel's market cap is over 200 billion dollars, but even if they were expected to replace 1 billion $100 processors that's half of the company's value. Since we're talking about 11 years worth of processors there is potential for the number to be more like 3-4 billion processors. This is purely the financial side and ignores all of the logistics which would be a totally separate nightmare. Intel is incapable of manufacturing anywhere close to that many processors in a year ESPECIALLY if they continue to sell new processors while doing the recall.
Intel simply cannot afford to recall all affected processors. Do not expect it to happen because it won't. They will obscurity-by-corporate-speak their way out of this in a way that could make Enron's obfuscated lies look tame. If there were no software mitigation they would have few straws to grasp at, but the OS workarounds give them a tiny escape door and you better believe that they'll hire a whole crew of bulldozers to force this massve elephant through it.
Microcode can change a lot of things about a processor, but microcode generally works by "pulling a bunch of strings" in the CPU control unit in a particular order for each CPU instruction encountered. Those "strings" go to a bunch of complex hard-wired circuits that can never be changed. I seriously doubt that the characteristics of the CPU TLB can be changed with a simple microcode update.
Go back to 4chan, troll. I'm long past done feeding you.
No, we don't know. You can hand-wave all you want with terms like "denialist" despite a lack of denial on my part (do you even know what the words you use mean?) but you have far less logic behind your position than I do; all you've really said is "authority; physics!" while ignoring all that I say which is contrary and logical yet inconvenient to your position. You say "weather isn't climate...climate is weather" unironically and lob insults at me as if that somehow supports your position.
Go back to 4chan, troll. I'm long past done feeding you.
Take a hint.
LOL. http://boards.4chan.org/sci/thread/9397327/global-warming-called-off
I'd mod you up if I had mod points. I've noticed plenty of unusually worded Intel-AMD equivocation comments across a variety of tech forums since this broke and it doesn't smell right for "Intel fanboys," it just smells like shilling.
This has become pitiful. You're just spinning in fallacious circles and even destroying your own arguments immediately after making them. The conversation is over on my side. I'll let the readers think what they wish, but this will clearly go nowhere from here. Feel free to continue replying into the ether if you want.