Of course this speaks nothing about the use of licences required to use an ever increasing part of the games, be it various forms of DLC, or even the ability to go online at all. If the new game comes with some such licence tied to PSN, which requires $10 or more to buy separately, that second hand copy might not seem as atractive anymore.
The answer to your rethorical question, would surprisingly to you be mostly yes. In patent law, "lack of working over an extended period in the territory of the patent" is grounds for applying for a "compulsory license" - which is the legal equivalent of use it or loose it regarding patent protection.
The other comparison also completely misses the point. The GPL'd software can clearly be licensed on fair and equal terms by everyone willing to abide by it's terms. The fact that the pricing on the software is 0 does not make it any less fair. Also, you must understand that the GPL is merely a license to distribute the software, which is still otherwise covered by copyright. So anyone willing to make contact with the rights holder(s) on that particular piece of software, is free to negotiate a different license with different terms and pricing than those offered by the GPL. The only legal similarity, is that both would have a hard time claiming any damages in a court case, as neither have any direct income from selling their product.
When I saw this conclusion, I looked up the background of the authors:
Mary Jander: BA, English and Business
Kim Davis: PhD, Philosophy
Nicole Ferraro: B.A. / M.A., Media Studies and Creative Writing
Clearly this bunch is qualified to tell the founders of the worlds fastest ever growing company which technology is not going to pan out 30 years from now. To their credit I was expecting to find the resumees of 3 MBA's. At least these guys are not soulless, merely clueless (about tech anyway)
Fortran isn't that bad, considering it's from 1957. Anyone who can do Fortran, could learn C++ very quickly, [begin rant] Cobol on the other hand was a step backwards the day it appeared in 1959, and it's creators should be bludgeoned with a frozen fish for even writing the design document. And yes - I've written tons of Cobol - it doesn't grow on you. It's probably the first example of the fundamental misconception, that it's desirable (if even possible) to make formal descriptions using informal language. The MBA's still think you can describe a piece of software in Word, and then it's a trivial process to make the software that customers want. Informal language is desirable to humans because it supports leaving out details - which is exactly what makes it useless for programming a computer. Using the word "plus" in stead of the symbol "+" is completely missing that fundamental point.[end rant]
Judging from the praise given to walled garden environments, like Apples app-store, I not so sure we can depend on technology to automatically free us from monitoring and control, by either government or big corp. However, such a fringe openion will never stand a chance in the 2 party systems of the US and UK. Even in the multiparty systems of continental Europe, the PP will struggle at elections, if it does not adopt some policy on mainstream subjects like employment and healthcare. Of course those passionate about the civic liberty agenda, will struggle to find agreement on the mainstream topics. (pardon my typos, I'm writing on an iPad. Can't wait to get back to my model M)
It's just to cheap for coorporate america to hedge it's bets when they only have to bribe.... errh I mean make campaign contributions, to 2 parties. Try to elect some representatives from the pirate party, like sweden has.
Reminds me that just last week (during scrum planning) when a small double digit integer multiplication came up, the project manager and I (both C.S. majors) each made the calculation in head agreeing down to the digit - a second later the business developer using the windows calculator, stated his answer which was off by 3 somehow. Scrum master calmly noted that 2 heads beat 1 calculator, and noone needed to confirm that.
Nonsense, the kids start learning group theory the minute they learn to tell the time on an old fashioned analog clock - which usually happens in the kindergarden.
I totally agree - but think it would be difficult to persuade the affected 97% to agree to the decimation. Let's face it - those of us who use or even enjoy math are the endangered species.
You do remember when the U.S congress went kindergarden, and decicded it didn't wan't borrow to cover the deficit that the very same people passed as a budget.
The U.S is currently letting the money printing press make up for the deficit, like the southern European countries used to do. Now that they are in the euro - they suddenly find out, that they have to go through the Germans to do that - and the answer so far has been: 'Nein!'
Reminds me that I have a dual Deschutes 350 in the attic somewhere. Served me faithfully from 1998 to 2004. If it wern't for the 128MB of memory and the price of electricity - I might still have it do..... uhm something. Trouble is it's still hard to do multithreading, and our programming languages are still inherently single thread, maybe with some thread primitives glued on.
The answer is, that the system delivers what most of people consider to be most essential, namely: Bread and circuses. Of course this reasoning preceded the Roman Republic's transformation into the Roman Empire before it's ultimate collapse
When you can repeat the experiment changing only a single starting parameter (like in physics) or devide participants into 2 statistically similar groups and change only a single starting parameter for one of the groups (like in medicine) you might (within the accepted definition of the word) "prove" causation.
But of course you are right - observing patterns in historic events proves nothing, and appening a hyphothesis to explain the observations to then pretend that it proves the hyphotesis is down right fraud. Unfortunately the latter thing is what gets relayed as news stories on a daily basis. It's really depressing.
So true - for linux to break the hold, there needs to be a fully compatible implementtion of directX running on x86/amd64 linux. And if it included a way of caching the drm nonsense, so you didn't have to be a disc jockey every time the kids wan't to play another game - gamers would be jumping to linux surprisingly quickly.
And it's not about piracy - I just really hate it when the previously played (expensive) game disc got scratched while laying on the table, because someone had to use the drive for something else.
As a Windows user, you can't stray to the dark corners of the internet, without the ever present fear of a malware infection. Of course you would never wan't to do that anyway, and me neither of course.... cough cough.... what? - I have sore throat
The problem with Office is the forced obsolecense with each new version of the file format. Most office users have had no compelling reason to upgrade their Office for about a decade - except some of their friends or business partners bought the new version as preinstalled on a new mashine, and started sending them documents in the new and incompatible format.
The problem is actually smaller for users of the free office clones, as that software catches up with the new format in a few months. If ther's a problem it's usually only if someone actually managed to find a use one of the new features. This is probably a deliberate business model, as otherwise most office users wouldn't bother to upgrade. Tell me what Office 2007 gave you, except perhaps an alibi to ask you boss for a 24" monitor to still have space for the ribbon while still being able to see a reasonable amount of text.
Longer answer: Your proposed solution is much slower than enen the simplest algorithm of trial division. As others have stated, brute forcing the symmetric 128-bit or 256-bit ciphers is considered practically impossible for the forseeable future. Your method would be similar to those brute force attacks - only on a 2048 bit key. Current factorting is in fact a lot more efficient than that - that's why you need 2048 bits instead of only 256 to be safe. The best know running time of factoring algorithms is in some sense 2/3 polynomial and 1/3 exponential - though the 1/3rd is still enough to twart any attempts at 2048 bit.
The patent system is a deviation from the free market standard, where the society sacrifices presumed benefits of comepetition to get something in return. The presumed benefits are 1: more rescources will be allocated to R&D, and 2: inventions once made, will not be kept as trade secrets.
There might be business value in realizing ther's a market for such a product - but ther's no significant inventive step from problem to solution. R&D is spent on solving problems. Finding problems is business development, and that's not in short supply or deserving protection from the market forces. Also such ideas cannot usually be profited from without disclosing. Thus, in this case the public doesn't get anything of value, that it wouldn't get without a patent system.
This would indeed be a consistent theory, but it's also not the kind of God that's usefull in a religious persons life. (Some) people need a god that can provide practical guidance in moral matters, and give a reassuring sense of purpose to their life. The basic problem is that the laws of physics don't seem to discriminate between good and evil the way most peple would like them to. Ther's simply no escaping that justice doen't come naturally to this world - hence the afterlife besomes a logical extension, as the only way of upholding good.
My point exactly. While RSA might have been invented by someone else in secret - the problem of how to realize a public key cryptosystem certainly had no obvious solutions when it was first proposed to the public. As is often the case, there were also other functional solutions to the same problem, though many were arguably infirior in one way or another. The public got something otherwise kept secret, in return for a limited monopoly - and as a result anyone can now implement RSA in their code.
On the other hand, I doubt we would be up to our knees in oval and triangular tablet computers, even if Apple had not graced us with the brilliance of the rectangular iPad.
Slashdot Mirror
No way Quake is more addictive than Pong. Pong FTW!
Of course this speaks nothing about the use of licences required to use an ever increasing part of the games, be it various forms of DLC, or even the ability to go online at all. If the new game comes with some such licence tied to PSN, which requires $10 or more to buy separately, that second hand copy might not seem as atractive anymore.
The answer to your rethorical question, would surprisingly to you be mostly yes. In patent law, "lack of working over an extended period in the territory of the patent" is grounds for applying for a "compulsory license" - which is the legal equivalent of use it or loose it regarding patent protection.
The other comparison also completely misses the point. The GPL'd software can clearly be licensed on fair and equal terms by everyone willing to abide by it's terms. The fact that the pricing on the software is 0 does not make it any less fair. Also, you must understand that the GPL is merely a license to distribute the software, which is still otherwise covered by copyright. So anyone willing to make contact with the rights holder(s) on that particular piece of software, is free to negotiate a different license with different terms and pricing than those offered by the GPL. The only legal similarity, is that both would have a hard time claiming any damages in a court case, as neither have any direct income from selling their product.
When I saw this conclusion, I looked up the background of the authors:
Mary Jander: BA, English and Business
Kim Davis: PhD, Philosophy
Nicole Ferraro: B.A. / M.A., Media Studies and Creative Writing
Clearly this bunch is qualified to tell the founders of the worlds fastest ever growing company which technology is not going to pan out 30 years from now. To their credit I was expecting to find the resumees of 3 MBA's. At least these guys are not soulless, merely clueless (about tech anyway)
As a matter of fact, the police, judge and jury are all going to factor in a long wrap sheet of petty crime - even in a murder case.
Fortran isn't that bad, considering it's from 1957. Anyone who can do Fortran, could learn C++ very quickly, [begin rant] Cobol on the other hand was a step backwards the day it appeared in 1959, and it's creators should be bludgeoned with a frozen fish for even writing the design document. And yes - I've written tons of Cobol - it doesn't grow on you. It's probably the first example of the fundamental misconception, that it's desirable (if even possible) to make formal descriptions using informal language. The MBA's still think you can describe a piece of software in Word, and then it's a trivial process to make the software that customers want. Informal language is desirable to humans because it supports leaving out details - which is exactly what makes it useless for programming a computer. Using the word "plus" in stead of the symbol "+" is completely missing that fundamental point.[end rant]
Judging from the praise given to walled garden environments, like Apples app-store, I not so sure we can depend on technology to automatically free us from monitoring and control, by either government or big corp. However, such a fringe openion will never stand a chance in the 2 party systems of the US and UK. Even in the multiparty systems of continental Europe, the PP will struggle at elections, if it does not adopt some policy on mainstream subjects like employment and healthcare. Of course those passionate about the civic liberty agenda, will struggle to find agreement on the mainstream topics. (pardon my typos, I'm writing on an iPad. Can't wait to get back to my model M)
It's just to cheap for coorporate america to hedge it's bets when they only have to bribe.... errh I mean make campaign contributions, to 2 parties. Try to elect some representatives from the pirate party, like sweden has.
3 years of business school, would allow you to get it wrong as well - but I guess some might consider it the same thing.
Reminds me that just last week (during scrum planning) when a small double digit integer multiplication came up, the project manager and I (both C.S. majors) each made the calculation in head agreeing down to the digit - a second later the business developer using the windows calculator, stated his answer which was off by 3 somehow. Scrum master calmly noted that 2 heads beat 1 calculator, and noone needed to confirm that.
not wanting to, is not the same as not being able to.
Nonsense, the kids start learning group theory the minute they learn to tell the time on an old fashioned analog clock - which usually happens in the kindergarden.
I totally agree - but think it would be difficult to persuade the affected 97% to agree to the decimation. Let's face it - those of us who use or even enjoy math are the endangered species.
You do remember when the U.S congress went kindergarden, and decicded it didn't wan't borrow to cover the deficit that the very same people passed as a budget.
The U.S is currently letting the money printing press make up for the deficit, like the southern European countries used to do. Now that they are in the euro - they suddenly find out, that they have to go through the Germans to do that - and the answer so far has been: 'Nein!'
Heart medication causes heart attacks.
A study finds that people on heart medication are 3 times more likely to suffer a sudden heart attack, than other people. The conclusion is obvious.
Reminds me that I have a dual Deschutes 350 in the attic somewhere. Served me faithfully from 1998 to 2004. If it wern't for the 128MB of memory and the price of electricity - I might still have it do..... uhm something. Trouble is it's still hard to do multithreading, and our programming languages are still inherently single thread, maybe with some thread primitives glued on.
The answer is, that the system delivers what most of people consider to be most essential, namely: Bread and circuses. Of course this reasoning preceded the Roman Republic's transformation into the Roman Empire before it's ultimate collapse
When you can repeat the experiment changing only a single starting parameter (like in physics) or devide participants into 2 statistically similar groups and change only a single starting parameter for one of the groups (like in medicine) you might (within the accepted definition of the word) "prove" causation.
But of course you are right - observing patterns in historic events proves nothing, and appening a hyphothesis to explain the observations to then pretend that it proves the hyphotesis is down right fraud. Unfortunately the latter thing is what gets relayed as news stories on a daily basis. It's really depressing.
So true - for linux to break the hold, there needs to be a fully compatible implementtion of directX running on x86/amd64 linux. And if it included a way of caching the drm nonsense, so you didn't have to be a disc jockey every time the kids wan't to play another game - gamers would be jumping to linux surprisingly quickly.
And it's not about piracy - I just really hate it when the previously played (expensive) game disc got scratched while laying on the table, because someone had to use the drive for something else.
As a Windows user, you can't stray to the dark corners of the internet, without the ever present fear of a malware infection. Of course you would never wan't to do that anyway, and me neither of course.... cough cough.... what? - I have sore throat
The problem with Office is the forced obsolecense with each new version of the file format. Most office users have had no compelling reason to upgrade their Office for about a decade - except some of their friends or business partners bought the new version as preinstalled on a new mashine, and started sending them documents in the new and incompatible format.
The problem is actually smaller for users of the free office clones, as that software catches up with the new format in a few months. If ther's a problem it's usually only if someone actually managed to find a use one of the new features. This is probably a deliberate business model, as otherwise most office users wouldn't bother to upgrade. Tell me what Office 2007 gave you, except perhaps an alibi to ask you boss for a 24" monitor to still have space for the ribbon while still being able to see a reasonable amount of text.
Short answer: NO!
Longer answer: Your proposed solution is much slower than enen the simplest algorithm of trial division. As others have stated, brute forcing the symmetric 128-bit or 256-bit ciphers is considered practically impossible for the forseeable future. Your method would be similar to those brute force attacks - only on a 2048 bit key. Current factorting is in fact a lot more efficient than that - that's why you need 2048 bits instead of only 256 to be safe. The best know running time of factoring algorithms is in some sense 2/3 polynomial and 1/3 exponential - though the 1/3rd is still enough to twart any attempts at 2048 bit.
The patent system is a deviation from the free market standard, where the society sacrifices presumed benefits of comepetition to get something in return. The presumed benefits are 1: more rescources will be allocated to R&D, and 2: inventions once made, will not be kept as trade secrets.
There might be business value in realizing ther's a market for such a product - but ther's no significant inventive step from problem to solution. R&D is spent on solving problems. Finding problems is business development, and that's not in short supply or deserving protection from the market forces. Also such ideas cannot usually be profited from without disclosing. Thus, in this case the public doesn't get anything of value, that it wouldn't get without a patent system.
This would indeed be a consistent theory, but it's also not the kind of God that's usefull in a religious persons life. (Some) people need a god that can provide practical guidance in moral matters, and give a reassuring sense of purpose to their life. The basic problem is that the laws of physics don't seem to discriminate between good and evil the way most peple would like them to. Ther's simply no escaping that justice doen't come naturally to this world - hence the afterlife besomes a logical extension, as the only way of upholding good.
My point exactly. While RSA might have been invented by someone else in secret - the problem of how to realize a public key cryptosystem certainly had no obvious solutions when it was first proposed to the public. As is often the case, there were also other functional solutions to the same problem, though many were arguably infirior in one way or another. The public got something otherwise kept secret, in return for a limited monopoly - and as a result anyone can now implement RSA in their code.
On the other hand, I doubt we would be up to our knees in oval and triangular tablet computers, even
if Apple had not graced us with the brilliance of the rectangular iPad.