Ethernet cables were designed to carry DATA, not power.
Using the same cable to carry both data and power has been going on for a century.
Running a 12W computer off PoE with any kind of distance to the power providing hub is going to require about 20W of input to make it work - with the 8W difference going to heat the cables.
This isn't a problem with telephone cables. Which tend to be both longer and of poorer overall quality than network cables. Ethernet has a maximum length of 100 metres as opposed to several kilometres for unrepeated telephone circuits.
I wasn't aware we were all living in a comic book. There are no "Forces of Crime" out there lurking that the police and judges need to gang up on and bend the intent of laws against.
There actually are "Forces of Crime" they are known as "Organised Criminals". Some of whom probably have the police on their side...
After a stolen presidential election in 2000 and a suspicious election in 2004, remember the exit polls that said one thing and the official results that said another I don't think just having elections proves anything. Unless they are fair and above reproach which America's haven't been since 2000.
Rather 2000 was the first time it was widely noticed. You could just as easily say that US elections havn't been fair and above reproach since 1812, when Elbridge Gerry gave his name to the term "gerrymandering". It's hard to see how any election can be fair when the people conducting the election are not (so far as is possible) independent of those standing in the election.
I don't know how the word "pirate" came to be associated with the downloading of movies or songs, but it makes no sense in this context.
The word has been used in such a way to describe copyright infringment (especially as a verb or adjective) for some decades.
A pirate is someone who boarded other ships on the high seas and robbed them of their treasures.
The term "pirate" is also used to refer to illegal broadcasters. The earliest "pirate radio stations" paid no royalties on the music they played. Not that they had to, operating in international waters.
I wish broadcasters and movie studios would learn from P2P instead of trying to eliminate it. I do not fit inside the typical demographic model they have for programs.
Assuming such people actually exist.
I have a 55+ hr a week job and a 1 year old. I usually cannot watch my favorite shows when they are scheduled, and it is a real pain to get a babysitter so I can go to a theatre just to get mad at little teeny-bopper punks running in and out of the theatre and talking all the time.
Companies don't like to change their business models. The problem from the point of view of the established players is they can be out competed.
What I want is non-commercial TV on demand and first release movies that I can watch at home without waiting 4-8 months for the DVD.
A newly formed Video on Demand company could probably easily undercut existing broadcasters. They have no need to develop, let alone maintain, infrastructure for broadcasting television over radio signals. In addition a new business without an established market has a lot more incentive to be competitive than one which has dacades of "business relationships" and "ways of doing things".
I will pay $100 - $150 a month for this type of service. They need to wake up to a missed financial opportunity.
It would make more sense for your money to go via a VoDTV. Which could be local to you. Then to a production company, which could be anywhere on the planet, depending on your taste in movies/TV. One of the things driving quite a lot of P2P is that the market material, especially in English (possibly also in Arabic), is Worldwide.
Um... There are a number of people at Guantanamo Bay (and Abu Ghraib) who might disagree with you. US law applies to anyone the Yanks don't like and can lay their hands on.
Except that US law most definitly does not apply to the people kidnaapped to Cuba. Effectivly the people held in Guantanamo Bay appear to be held somewhere where their kidnappers are not subject to any country's laws.
US law only applies to USians. If you were a US citizen in the UK, sure, you could get into trouble.
No doubt "they" (Tony and George) are working on ways around that.
Extradition doesn't mean you enforce foreign law on your citizens, it means you agree to repatriate foreign countries' citizens if they're wanted by the courts.
Subject to certain conditions. No doubt someone is working on new wording for a "free trade agreement" to get round this limitation...
How long until congress goes the final step and auctions off laws? It's obvious that many of the recent laws are simply bought, even if the politically correct term is "lobbyism".
Possibly even more disturbing is that some of them may have been bought with public money. However indirectly.
Why not go the whole nine yards? In the long run, it'll be the only way to save the exploding deficit anyways.
Does anyone (or any country) actually have enough spare cash to do that:)
you know, the last time i check this country was supposed to be, by the people for the people and of the people. now it seems like its
by the corporations, for the Corporations, and of the upper 1% Not even that. The Corporations doing the lobbying are only a tiny minority of those which exist. It's probably closer to the truth to say that the US is being run by professional lobbyests. Who represent the interests of a few corporations, organised crime, nutcases and possibly even foreign governments.
Remember kids, when you use P2P, you're supporting terrorists, and because of that, using P2P will get you shipped to Syria where a confession will be tortured out of you, and then you'll be imprisoned without trial or access to a lawyer until such time as Democrats seize control of the government.
Which probably won't result in any more than cosmetic changes. If you have only two political parties it's quite cheap for special interests to buy both of them.
At first, they wanted to cut off all four of my limbs. However, after years of negotiation, and much effort, we've managed to reach a compromise where they only cut off my left foot.
For political kudos they are only going to cut off your left toes. At least this year, next year they are working of a way to cut both your legs off at the knee.
So you think there is a legitimate need to distribute movies before they are released?
Is there a legitimate need for "release dates"? Epecially having different ones according to geography. What's so difficult about just realeasing the movie when it is finished?
In my country, copyright infringement just became a crime a few months ago. That would not piss me off so much except that the official reason given for it being made a crime was "In order to comply with FTA agreements with the USA." Yes. That actually means that the government has imposed harsher penalties than you americans do on your own people.
So called "Free Trade Agreements" arn't really anything of the sort. More ways for the US to get other countries to help them out of the huge economic hole they are in.
Somewhere along the way I feel that we've gone drastically wrong over here. Then I read about how Bush is pushing through jail terms for people who are sharing copyrighted files.
The US is already "number one" when it comes to jailing it's own citizens. (Let alone kidnapping people and taking them to Cuba.)
This isn't an issue of privilege, it's an issue of privacy laws. The university is required *BY LAW* to keep your information secret under state privacy laws. They cannot divulge stuff like >BR>
* Your SIN
* Your Student #
* Your DOB
* Your class schedule
* Your phone #
* Your address
Also presumably the "reverse". e.g. asking who lives at a specific address, who has a specific phone number, who is in a certin class, etc.
When a lawyer tells a poor person that they must pay $3000 as a 'settlement' for listening to music or go to jail for piracy, the person who doesn't have $3000 to just give away to the lawyer will 'up the ante' by telling the lawyer to drop the case or they will kill him.
This would be especially ironic if the average sentence for murder was less than that for file sharing...
It won't take all that many dead record company lawyers for the message to get through that you can only extort money from people who have money.
So long as they don't have enough money to afford lawyers of their own...
Since when do Universities or ISPs profess to protect your anonymity when you are connected to the inherently public Internet? "hulk" and "CadillacMan" weren't doing anything *private*. If they were doing something private then no one would have known that they had copyrighted material to distributed illegally.
At this point they are "alleged" to be doing this. N.B. this kind of accusation can be as weak as regular expression match with a filename.
What these students did was illegal, and the school has the information that the copyright owners need in order to press charges.
Courts work on the basis of "innocent until proven guilty". If you can't obtain such proof even if you "know" someone is guilty then tough. At best your case will be thrown out, at worst the judge can find you in "contempt of court".
In essence the University is witness to a crime, and it is refusing to testify.
Unless there is a relevent law or court order then witnesses (especially third party witnesses) simply cannot be compelled to testify.
After all, building a case against a filesharer is only as difficult as getting their IP address and a list of the files that they have available for download.
Since no cases have actually come before a judge it's impossible to know what kind of case actually needs to be built.
Verifying that the files in question truly are your property probably would be helpful, but you've got "probable cause" either way.
Unless you actually do this then you have no "standing" in the first place. Third parties simply cannot take legal action in the case of suspected copyright violations.
Also APB have sent out a large amount of letters to scare people who uses common P2P programs, they haven't done that directly thought, they have given the IP-address to the ISP which have forwarded the message to the costumer. However noone I know using the ISP Bredbandsbolaget have gotten any mail/letters,
Probably because they are an ISP rather than a post offfice. Even if they did provide a post forwarding service has APB paid...
and it's said Labs2 doesn't send out any either, because they don't care about what the private APB wants. Labs2 have also said they have gone one step longer only logging what is required by law and stop logging the rest to protect the privacy of their users.
Most likely also to avoid the costs of doing something they don't need to do in the first place.
In contrast, my guess is that their real reason for existing is "to strip users of their existing rights to use the programs and data on their computers so that copyright holders can dictate if, when, and how users may access them".
In practice this is likely to take control away from a great many actual copyright holders. Since the majority of the data is most definitly not copyright of any software vendor. Typically the copyright holder will be either the user or the user's employer. It really dosn't make much sense for a minority to hold hostage the "intellectual property" of the majority because that minority thinks their "intellectual property" may be "misused".
Yeah there is, they can stop selling to the UK audience.
Not if they want to sell anywhere in the EU they can't.
If you lie on a web site and say you are from the US when it asks if you are from the UK you'll be prosecuted for fraud.
Assuming any government could be bothered bringing such a prosecution. Most likely the police would arrest whoever made the complaint for wasting their time.
I live in UK and before arriving here I thought I would find cheaper CD's than in my country (I am from Mexico), to my surprise, while in MX the CD's (European Metal) where like $15 USD each one, here in UK they are at GBP 15 (darn pund symbol =oP),
This is not uncommon
and in Spain, France and other EU countries they are cheaper (13 Euros)...
Using the actual exchange rates something like 8 GPB or 12 EUR would be closer to 15 USD.
How about security and piracy. Did they think about that? Doubt so. And safety regulations? On both oil platforms and cruise ships everyone that works there needs to take a (two?) weeks safety course. Lots of $ there too.
An oil platform has the advantage that dosn't need to be supplied with fuel. Most oil fields have enough methane to run a platform even if it isn't commercially viable to pipe gas ashore as well as oil.
One assumes that its not going to be continuously moving around (unless it moves in an arc pattern, it cant be 3.1 miles off the coast of LA and still stay 3.1 miles off the coast) so it wont need quite as much fuel.
If the water isn't too deep then it could possible anchor. Otherwise it would need use it's propulsive system in order to maintain position. You'd still need power for lighting, heating, desalination as well as the computers. Depending on the design of the ship this might come from the same engines anyway. There are ships where all of the propulsive power comes from electric motors.
Slashdot Mirror
Ethernet cables were designed to carry DATA, not power.
Using the same cable to carry both data and power has been going on for a century.
Running a 12W computer off PoE with any kind of distance to the power providing hub is going to require about 20W of input to make it work - with the 8W difference going to heat the cables.
This isn't a problem with telephone cables. Which tend to be both longer and of poorer overall quality than network cables. Ethernet has a maximum length of 100 metres as opposed to several kilometres for unrepeated telephone circuits.
This might work in a new layout for wifi access points, but then you'll be restricted to WiFi components that fit this motif.
How many access points need more that 15w of power?
I wasn't aware we were all living in a comic book. There are no "Forces of Crime" out there lurking that the police and judges need to gang up on and bend the intent of laws against.
There actually are "Forces of Crime" they are known as "Organised Criminals". Some of whom probably have the police on their side...
After a stolen presidential election in 2000 and a suspicious election in 2004, remember the exit polls that said one thing and the official results that said another I don't think just having elections proves anything. Unless they are fair and above reproach which America's haven't been since 2000.
Rather 2000 was the first time it was widely noticed. You could just as easily say that US elections havn't been fair and above reproach since 1812, when Elbridge Gerry gave his name to the term "gerrymandering". It's hard to see how any election can be fair when the people conducting the election are not (so far as is possible) independent of those standing in the election.
I don't know how the word "pirate" came to be associated with the downloading of movies or songs, but it makes no sense in this context.
The word has been used in such a way to describe copyright infringment (especially as a verb or adjective) for some decades.
A pirate is someone who boarded other ships on the high seas and robbed them of their treasures.
The term "pirate" is also used to refer to illegal broadcasters. The earliest "pirate radio stations" paid no royalties on the music they played. Not that they had to, operating in international waters.
I wish broadcasters and movie studios would learn from P2P instead of trying to eliminate it. I do not fit inside the typical demographic model they have for programs.
Assuming such people actually exist.
I have a 55+ hr a week job and a 1 year old. I usually cannot watch my favorite shows when they are scheduled, and it is a real pain to get a babysitter so I can go to a theatre just to get mad at little teeny-bopper punks running in and out of the theatre and talking all the time.
Companies don't like to change their business models. The problem from the point of view of the established players is they can be out competed.
What I want is non-commercial TV on demand and first release movies that I can watch at home without waiting 4-8 months for the DVD.
A newly formed Video on Demand company could probably easily undercut existing broadcasters. They have no need to develop, let alone maintain, infrastructure for broadcasting television over radio signals. In addition a new business without an established market has a lot more incentive to be competitive than one which has dacades of "business relationships" and "ways of doing things".
I will pay $100 - $150 a month for this type of service. They need to wake up to a missed financial opportunity.
It would make more sense for your money to go via a VoDTV. Which could be local to you. Then to a production company, which could be anywhere on the planet, depending on your taste in movies/TV. One of the things driving quite a lot of P2P is that the market material, especially in English (possibly also in Arabic), is Worldwide.
Um... There are a number of people at Guantanamo Bay (and Abu Ghraib) who might disagree with you. US law applies to anyone the Yanks don't like and can lay their hands on.
Except that US law most definitly does not apply to the people kidnaapped to Cuba. Effectivly the people held in Guantanamo Bay appear to be held somewhere where their kidnappers are not subject to any country's laws.
US law only applies to USians. If you were a US citizen in the UK, sure, you could get into trouble.
No doubt "they" (Tony and George) are working on ways around that.
Extradition doesn't mean you enforce foreign law on your citizens, it means you agree to repatriate foreign countries' citizens if they're wanted by the courts.
Subject to certain conditions.
No doubt someone is working on new wording for a "free trade agreement" to get round this limitation...
How long until congress goes the final step and auctions off laws? It's obvious that many of the recent laws are simply bought, even if the politically correct term is "lobbyism".
:)
Possibly even more disturbing is that some of them may have been bought with public money. However indirectly.
Why not go the whole nine yards? In the long run, it'll be the only way to save the exploding deficit anyways.
Does anyone (or any country) actually have enough spare cash to do that
you know, the last time i check this country was supposed to be, by the people for the people and of the people. now it seems like its by the corporations, for the Corporations, and of the upper 1%
Not even that. The Corporations doing the lobbying are only a tiny minority of those which exist. It's probably closer to the truth to say that the US is being run by professional lobbyests. Who represent the interests of a few corporations, organised crime, nutcases and possibly even foreign governments.
Remember kids, when you use P2P, you're supporting terrorists, and because of that, using P2P will get you shipped to Syria where a confession will be tortured out of you, and then you'll be imprisoned without trial or access to a lawyer until such time as Democrats seize control of the government.
Which probably won't result in any more than cosmetic changes. If you have only two political parties it's quite cheap for special interests to buy both of them.
At first, they wanted to cut off all four of my limbs. However, after years of negotiation, and much effort, we've managed to reach a compromise where they only cut off my left foot.
For political kudos they are only going to cut off your left toes. At least this year, next year they are working of a way to cut both your legs off at the knee.
So you think there is a legitimate need to distribute movies before they are released?
Is there a legitimate need for "release dates"? Epecially having different ones according to geography. What's so difficult about just realeasing the movie when it is finished?
In my country, copyright infringement just became a crime a few months ago. That would not piss me off so much except that the official reason given for it being made a crime was "In order to comply with FTA agreements with the USA." Yes. That actually means that the government has imposed harsher penalties than you americans do on your own people.
So called "Free Trade Agreements" arn't really anything of the sort. More ways for the US to get other countries to help them out of the huge economic hole they are in.
Somewhere along the way I feel that we've gone drastically wrong over here. Then I read about how Bush is pushing through jail terms for people who are sharing copyrighted files.
The US is already "number one" when it comes to jailing it's own citizens. (Let alone kidnapping people and taking them to Cuba.)
This isn't an issue of privilege, it's an issue of privacy laws. The university is required *BY LAW* to keep your information secret under state privacy laws. They cannot divulge stuff like
>BR> * Your SIN
* Your Student #
* Your DOB
* Your class schedule
* Your phone #
* Your address
Also presumably the "reverse". e.g. asking who lives at a specific address, who has a specific phone number, who is in a certin class, etc.
When a lawyer tells a poor person that they must pay $3000 as a 'settlement' for listening to music or go to jail for piracy, the person who doesn't have $3000 to just give away to the lawyer will 'up the ante' by telling the lawyer to drop the case or they will kill him.
This would be especially ironic if the average sentence for murder was less than that for file sharing...
It won't take all that many dead record company lawyers for the message to get through that you can only extort money from people who have money.
So long as they don't have enough money to afford lawyers of their own...
Since when do Universities or ISPs profess to protect your anonymity when you are connected to the inherently public Internet? "hulk" and "CadillacMan" weren't doing anything *private*. If they were doing something private then no one would have known that they had copyrighted material to distributed illegally.
At this point they are "alleged" to be doing this. N.B. this kind of accusation can be as weak as regular expression match with a filename.
What these students did was illegal, and the school has the information that the copyright owners need in order to press charges.
Courts work on the basis of "innocent until proven guilty". If you can't obtain such proof even if you "know" someone is guilty then tough. At best your case will be thrown out, at worst the judge can find you in "contempt of court".
In essence the University is witness to a crime, and it is refusing to testify.
Unless there is a relevent law or court order then witnesses (especially third party witnesses) simply cannot be compelled to testify.
After all, building a case against a filesharer is only as difficult as getting their IP address and a list of the files that they have available for download.
Since no cases have actually come before a judge it's impossible to know what kind of case actually needs to be built.
Verifying that the files in question truly are your property probably would be helpful, but you've got "probable cause" either way.
Unless you actually do this then you have no "standing" in the first place. Third parties simply cannot take legal action in the case of suspected copyright violations.
Also APB have sent out a large amount of letters to scare people who uses common P2P programs, they haven't done that directly thought, they have given the IP-address to the ISP which have forwarded the message to the costumer. However noone I know using the ISP Bredbandsbolaget have gotten any mail/letters,
Probably because they are an ISP rather than a post offfice. Even if they did provide a post forwarding service has APB paid...
and it's said Labs2 doesn't send out any either, because they don't care about what the private APB wants. Labs2 have also said they have gone one step longer only logging what is required by law and stop logging the rest to protect the privacy of their users.
Most likely also to avoid the costs of doing something they don't need to do in the first place.
In contrast, my guess is that their real reason for existing is "to strip users of their existing rights to use the programs and data on their computers so that copyright holders can dictate if, when, and how users may access them".
In practice this is likely to take control away from a great many actual copyright holders. Since the majority of the data is most definitly not copyright of any software vendor. Typically the copyright holder will be either the user or the user's employer.
It really dosn't make much sense for a minority to hold hostage the "intellectual property" of the majority because that minority thinks their "intellectual property" may be "misused".
In fact you, the user, are not the intended beneficiary of "trusted computing" at all.
Nor if you are sysadmin of a (large number of) machine(s).
In other words, no more pulling out a drive to virus-scan it then replacing it
Or to recover data from a crashed OS install.
or replacing a drive on an OEM machine - that won't allow it to boot.
Is this also going to make it difficult to "clone" a standard install. If so then the TCO has just been greatly increased.
Yeah there is, they can stop selling to the UK audience.
Not if they want to sell anywhere in the EU they can't.
If you lie on a web site and say you are from the US when it asks if you are from the UK you'll be prosecuted for fraud.
Assuming any government could be bothered bringing such a prosecution. Most likely the police would arrest whoever made the complaint for wasting their time.
I live in UK and before arriving here I thought I would find cheaper CD's than in my country (I am from Mexico), to my surprise, while in MX the CD's (European Metal) where like $15 USD each one, here in UK they are at GBP 15 (darn pund symbol =oP),
This is not uncommon
and in Spain, France and other EU countries they are cheaper (13 Euros)...
Using the actual exchange rates something like 8 GPB or 12 EUR would be closer to 15 USD.
How about security and piracy. Did they think about that? Doubt so. And safety regulations? On both oil platforms and cruise ships everyone that works there needs to take a (two?) weeks safety course. Lots of $ there too.
An oil platform has the advantage that dosn't need to be supplied with fuel. Most oil fields have enough methane to run a platform even if it isn't commercially viable to pipe gas ashore as well as oil.
One assumes that its not going to be continuously moving around (unless it moves in an arc pattern, it cant be 3.1 miles off the coast of LA and still stay 3.1 miles off the coast) so it wont need quite as much fuel.
If the water isn't too deep then it could possible anchor. Otherwise it would need use it's propulsive system in order to maintain position.
You'd still need power for lighting, heating, desalination as well as the computers. Depending on the design of the ship this might come from the same engines anyway. There are ships where all of the propulsive power comes from electric motors.