I think the reality is that the exchange of ideas necessary for building up a significant body of knowledge only works in an empire of the size of China or Rome, and these are more the exception than the rule.
You missed off the "Arab Empire" which is probably more relevent to Europe than China.
Startum 1 servers aren't "expensive" nor are they a limited resource; any time server that pulls its timebase from GPS, for example, is stratum 1.
The problems come where you have embedded devices which have a small number of (S)NTP servers hardcoded. This can easily create a distributed denial of service, especially since a coder likely do this is also likely to make other mistakes in their implimentation. If the idea is for the device to autoconfigure it needs to be picking randomly from a large list or able to discover which server(s) it should be using. e.g. DHCP, SLP, etc.
I'm also wondering just how much mayhem this guy could cause on various networks by playing with the time he returns. I'm not advocating that...I'm just pointing out that D-Link is rather leaving the owners of their routers open to whatever he chooses to do to them.
Depends if the device (or user) actually cares if the time is correct.
The GPL basically says they don't have to release one bit of code if they keep everything internal.
Actually copyright law says that you need permission to pass copies to third parties. This is the definition which matters as opposed to whatever some software company might like to define "release" to mean.
When the Samba developers do not maintain close communication with Microsoft about potential changes to roaming profiles and implement support for those changes, it is not Microsoft's fault when things break. It is the Samba team's fault.
It would be the Samba Team's fault if a change they made to the server which caused the breakage.
When you cannot get support for your PDC because it is running a non-Microsoft platform, that is not Microsoft's fault. It is your platform provider's fault.
The platform in question is Microsoft Windows XP. The platform provider here is Microsoft. However they chose to change the behaviour of their platform without clearly documenting these changes.
It'd a dirt road that's hundreds of years old (literally) there's more than enough tarmac in the area, drivers do not have to go of into fields. The problem is there are lots of poorer roads in the area and GPS systems don't know the difference between a poor road and a farm track.
All the need is a sign saying:
NOT THIS WAY, YOUR GPS IS WRONG -- RTFM! (MAP!).
Unless it's the same map used by the makers of the GPS device which dosn't distinguish between minor roads and tracks. Probably is that anyone who can't recognise that the "road" isn't suitable for their vehicle probably isn't going to bother to read the sign either. There are plenty of idiots driving cars.
1) Doesn't work:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4867880. stm
(signs telling people not to park where it floods - people still don't move their cars even when the locals tell them it will flood)
The rising cost of insurance, for drivers do don't bother to read these signs, should have the desired effect eventually.
You know the only time a free market can allow something like that to happen? When you have a oligarchy. And that's what the big backbones providers want. They want to consolidate the market, and start putting tarriffs in at peering sites.
The results of this are nothing resembling a "free market", very soon the result is a cartel which can keep anyone else out of the business.
And I don't know about you, but I can reserve things over the internet, and all libraries have that.
What makes a reservation over The Internet conceptually different doing the same thing by fax, phone, telegram, post, semaphore or proxy? The concept of telecommunication has been around since prehistory.
Just because Netflix was first to market and to the patent office, it doesn't mean they were first with the idea, or that it's not an obvious idea. It just wasn't common knowledge.
Or it wasn't common knowlage amongst patent examiners and they couldn't find any documented examples of "prior art". Problem is that the obscure is more likely to be documented than the common and/or obvious.
You know, it always seems obvious after the fact, doesn't it? But nobody, *nobody* was doing waht netflix was doing before netflix patented it.
Or maybe plenty of people had been doing exactly the same thing, but netflix was the first to make a big fuss about it. One big problem with patents is that "obvious" is unlikely to be well documented... Thus you really need the people checking the patents to be highly familiar with the relevent "state of the art".
Re:weird perspective for a conflict... and wrong!
on
Sun's Open Source DRM
·
· Score: 1
How does DRM change that? All it does is inconvenience legitimate customers. Piracy groups can and will strip the DRM out with little trouble, and then distribute a DRM-free version.
Or they can find a source where there never was any DRM on in the first place...
What if we approach the idea from a different perspective? What if we could setup things so that people wouldn't want to share those files in the first place? And, incidentally, so you could play them on any device you own?
You do this by ensuring that the "official source" is the easy option. e.g. no region coding/staggered releases, reasonable prices, if it's downloaded make sure that plenty of bandwidth is available, if it's on physical media make sure it's either in shops or available to be airfreighted.
Here's how. I buy a song from a iTMS-like store and it's downloaded as normal. During the process, the file was also watermarked and digitally signed with your name, address, and credit card number, which was also appended to the file in plaintext.
This adds all sorts of pointless complexity and is likely to inconvenience the customer who may well not remember what their credit card number was a few years back. If someone has changed their name, address and credit card number the "disincentive factor" dosn't work anyway.
Re:weird perspective for a conflict... and wrong!
on
Sun's Open Source DRM
·
· Score: 1
The assumption here is that DRM significantly deters piracy. This claim is far from obviously true, and I have never seen any solid evidence to support it. However, it is known that people who use media encumbered by DRM if anything have a worse experience than those who use unencumbered media (including pirates).
It's possible that using DRM will actually increase piracy. Because a pirated copy, without DRM, is of more utility to the customer.
Definitely providing value to the customers is a better idea (and a sounder business decision) than possibly putting a small dent in piracy while inconveniencing legitimate customers.
This isn't just a case of not using DRM it is also likely to involve changes in business practices. e.g. less of the business of "staggered releases".
Re:weird perspective for a conflict... and wrong!
on
Sun's Open Source DRM
·
· Score: 1
So how about DRM that let's YOU do whatever you want with it? (Except put it on the internet, which you implied you weren't going to do anyway.)
Because in order to do this you'd need actual magic or at the very least a genuine artificial intelligence quite a bit harder to fool than a human being.
Then you must not shop or go anywhere in the real world. Security guards, cameras, devices, inspectors, ticket takers, why, any typical bricks-and-morter store has more security and "lack-of-trust" than you can shake a stick at.
However these stay at the place of business in question. They only have a right to monitor their property, they can't invade yours, even if your are a customer.
In California, there's a "non-driver's ID card" that you can get if you don't drive. The state started issuing them several decades ago so that non-drivers had some sort of state issued ID to use.
Were US Citizen who didn't drive in California prevented from getting a passport?
What do you mean America is close to this? I need a driving license to do anything in the US (at least in most states). Not only do I need a license to drive a car but I seem to need a license for countless other things too, like using a credit card in many stores or buying alcohol.
The latter scoring highly on the "daft ideas" scale.
The old UK license was as far from an ID card as you can imagine.
How many other "machine operators permits" do you know of which perport to be identity documents?
It's only recently that the UK has caught up with the US.
of course to be secure the database will have to be safeguarded against the data being changed so that unscrupulious staff arent payed to mess with the data by organised crime gangs
Note that "organised crime gangs" includes a fair few terrorists in addition you will get spys (both domestic and foreign) involved.
etc ah the wonders of mutually exclusive requirements, plus of course anyone with access to the database will be able to blow the cover of undercover Police and spys.
Without needing to alter any data. The only good thing is that the past record for such IT systems means that it might just not be usable at all.
Now, on 2006 April 1, Slashdot is reporting about a technology that will enable us to create "supermen", like those described in the Star-Trek episode titled "Space Seed".
Most likely they'll have completed flying pigs long before they even start work on honest politicans:)
Slashdot Mirror
I wouldn't see so many of those pirated movies on the street if folks weren't buying them.
If it's a choice between the pirated copy and not being able to see the movie it's hardly a suprise if people are buying them.
Seriously. Why is Real even around any more?
Because certain content providers insist on using Real's formats for their content.
I think the reality is that the exchange of ideas necessary for building up a significant body of knowledge only works in an empire of the size of China or Rome, and these are more the exception than the rule.
You missed off the "Arab Empire" which is probably more relevent to Europe than China.
I can see some D-link manager make a checkmark in their pocket book: "Remember to not visit Denmark under true name".
Can't that easily be re-written to "Remember not to visit the European Union"?
DLink isn't bound by a contract they never signed nor agreed to.
A better analogy would be one of tresspass
The server never asks for consent to its terms prior to allowing you to use it.
The gate to a field carrying a sign stating "no tresspassers" typically dosn't validate who goes through it.
Startum 1 servers aren't "expensive" nor are they a limited resource; any time server that pulls its timebase from GPS, for example, is stratum 1.
The problems come where you have embedded devices which have a small number of (S)NTP servers hardcoded. This can easily create a distributed denial of service, especially since a coder likely do this is also likely to make other mistakes in their implimentation.
If the idea is for the device to autoconfigure it needs to be picking randomly from a large list or able to discover which server(s) it should be using. e.g. DHCP, SLP, etc.
I'm also wondering just how much mayhem this guy could cause on various networks by playing with the time he returns. I'm not advocating that...I'm just pointing out that D-Link is rather leaving the owners of their routers open to whatever he chooses to do to them.
Depends if the device (or user) actually cares if the time is correct.
The GPL basically says they don't have to release one bit of code if they keep everything internal.
Actually copyright law says that you need permission to pass copies to third parties. This is the definition which matters as opposed to whatever some software company might like to define "release" to mean.
When the Samba developers do not maintain close communication with Microsoft about potential changes to roaming profiles and implement support for those changes, it is not Microsoft's fault when things break. It is the Samba team's fault.
It would be the Samba Team's fault if a change they made to the server which caused the breakage.
When you cannot get support for your PDC because it is running a non-Microsoft platform, that is not Microsoft's fault. It is your platform provider's fault.
The platform in question is Microsoft Windows XP. The platform provider here is Microsoft. However they chose to change the behaviour of their platform without clearly documenting these changes.
It'd a dirt road that's hundreds of years old (literally) there's more than enough tarmac in the area, drivers do not have to go of into fields. The problem is there are lots of poorer roads in the area and GPS systems don't know the difference between a poor road and a farm track.
All the need is a sign saying:
NOT THIS WAY, YOUR GPS IS WRONG -- RTFM! (MAP!).
Unless it's the same map used by the makers of the GPS device which dosn't distinguish between minor roads and tracks.
Probably is that anyone who can't recognise that the "road" isn't suitable for their vehicle probably isn't going to bother to read the sign either. There are plenty of idiots driving cars.
Yes there is a reason - it's a rock-strewn farm track rather than a surfaced road and it isn't suitable for motor vehicles,
Except possibly a real "all terrain" vehicle, which few people other than farmers are likely to have.
1) Doesn't work: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4867880. stm
(signs telling people not to park where it floods - people still don't move their cars even when the locals tell them it will flood)
The rising cost of insurance, for drivers do don't bother to read these signs, should have the desired effect eventually.
You know the only time a free market can allow something like that to happen? When you have a oligarchy. And that's what the big backbones providers want. They want to consolidate the market, and start putting tarriffs in at peering sites.
The results of this are nothing resembling a "free market", very soon the result is a cartel which can keep anyone else out of the business.
So, reading this backwards, a third of embedded systems developers are interested in embedded Linux and/or expect to be using it soon.
What proportion of embedded systems require a general purpose OS, indeed what proportion require any sort of OS at all?
And I don't know about you, but I can reserve things over the internet, and all libraries have that.
What makes a reservation over The Internet conceptually different doing the same thing by fax, phone, telegram, post, semaphore or proxy? The concept of telecommunication has been around since prehistory.
Just because Netflix was first to market and to the patent office, it doesn't mean they were first with the idea, or that it's not an obvious idea. It just wasn't common knowledge.
Or it wasn't common knowlage amongst patent examiners and they couldn't find any documented examples of "prior art". Problem is that the obscure is more likely to be documented than the common and/or obvious.
You know, it always seems obvious after the fact, doesn't it? But nobody, *nobody* was doing waht netflix was doing before netflix patented it.
Or maybe plenty of people had been doing exactly the same thing, but netflix was the first to make a big fuss about it.
One big problem with patents is that "obvious" is unlikely to be well documented... Thus you really need the people checking the patents to be highly familiar with the relevent "state of the art".
How does DRM change that? All it does is inconvenience legitimate customers. Piracy groups can and will strip the DRM out with little trouble, and then distribute a DRM-free version.
Or they can find a source where there never was any DRM on in the first place...
What if we approach the idea from a different perspective? What if we could setup things so that people wouldn't want to share those files in the first place? And, incidentally, so you could play them on any device you own?
You do this by ensuring that the "official source" is the easy option. e.g. no region coding/staggered releases, reasonable prices, if it's downloaded make sure that plenty of bandwidth is available, if it's on physical media make sure it's either in shops or available to be airfreighted.
Here's how. I buy a song from a iTMS-like store and it's downloaded as normal. During the process, the file was also watermarked and digitally signed with your name, address, and credit card number, which was also appended to the file in plaintext.
This adds all sorts of pointless complexity and is likely to inconvenience the customer who may well not remember what their credit card number was a few years back. If someone has changed their name, address and credit card number the "disincentive factor" dosn't work anyway.
The assumption here is that DRM significantly deters piracy. This claim is far from obviously true, and I have never seen any solid evidence to support it. However, it is known that people who use media encumbered by DRM if anything have a worse experience than those who use unencumbered media (including pirates).
It's possible that using DRM will actually increase piracy. Because a pirated copy, without DRM, is of more utility to the customer.
Definitely providing value to the customers is a better idea (and a sounder business decision) than possibly putting a small dent in piracy while inconveniencing legitimate customers.
This isn't just a case of not using DRM it is also likely to involve changes in business practices. e.g. less of the business of "staggered releases".
So how about DRM that let's YOU do whatever you want with it? (Except put it on the internet, which you implied you weren't going to do anyway.)
Because in order to do this you'd need actual magic or at the very least a genuine artificial intelligence quite a bit harder to fool than a human being.
Then you must not shop or go anywhere in the real world. Security guards, cameras, devices, inspectors, ticket takers, why, any typical bricks-and-morter store has more security and "lack-of-trust" than you can shake a stick at.
However these stay at the place of business in question. They only have a right to monitor their property, they can't invade yours, even if your are a customer.
In California, there's a "non-driver's ID card" that you can get if you don't drive. The state started issuing them several decades ago so that non-drivers had some sort of state issued ID to use.
Were US Citizen who didn't drive in California prevented from getting a passport?
What do you mean America is close to this? I need a driving license to do anything in the US (at least in most states). Not only do I need a license to drive a car but I seem to need a license for countless other things too, like using a credit card in many stores or buying alcohol.
The latter scoring highly on the "daft ideas" scale.
The old UK license was as far from an ID card as you can imagine.
How many other "machine operators permits" do you know of which perport to be identity documents?
It's only recently that the UK has caught up with the US.
This is a good thing???
of course to be secure the database will have to be safeguarded against the data being changed so that unscrupulious staff arent payed to mess with the data by organised crime gangs
Note that "organised crime gangs" includes a fair few terrorists in addition you will get spys (both domestic and foreign) involved.
etc ah the wonders of mutually exclusive requirements, plus of course anyone with access to the database will be able to blow the cover of undercover Police and spys.
Without needing to alter any data.
The only good thing is that the past record for such IT systems means that it might just not be usable at all.
Now, on 2006 April 1, Slashdot is reporting about a technology that will enable us to create "supermen", like those described in the Star-Trek episode titled "Space Seed".
:)
Most likely they'll have completed flying pigs long before they even start work on honest politicans