Tell them to release the SOURCE for their encoder and player - and then ask people to hack it. If they can't do that (e.g. it's based on security through obscurity) then they it will never be secure.
XBox not up to the level of the Gamecube? That's a joke - the Gamecube is VERY substandard hardware (especially for a 2k1 console). It has less RAM and a slower video processor than the PS2, and FAR less than the XBox (which has nearly 10X the polygon power on paper, and has nearly 3X the memory + a hard drive).
The gamecube was originally slated to come out in '99 as a comptetitor to the Dreamcast, and if it had come out then it probably would have been a decent system. As it stands now, it will only survive on the strength of Pokemon.
Actually Colossus was not created to break Engima, Enigma was broken using the Bombes, which were machines based on a Polish design.
Colossus tacked the much more difficult Lorenz Cipher (aka the Fish cipher) used starting in 1941 for the most important communications between Hitler and his generals.
Really the most amazing thing about Colossus was not that it was a programmable computer (sure that's cool) but that it could read paper teleprinter tape at 30 miles per hour (5k characters per second!). It could operate on 5 tapes in parallel, processing 25k of data per second - about the speed of a broadband connection today!
As far as I know, Mac Q3 does not have support for "native" mods like RA3. I'm looking into the possibility of doing a QVM version for Mac, but that may be difficult because of some of RA3's advanced features.
OS X on the other hand should have great support for native mods (through shared libraries) and I plan to support it once available.
I'm very much in agreement with the Web Standards letter to AOL/Netscape posted a few days ago.
If designers continue to cater to the limitations of Netscape 4 the platform will never die and exciting new technologies like CSS and DHTML will not be usable. SOMEONE has to start using those technologies first, to drive up adoption of newer browsers that support these technologies. It's not going to be yahoo.com or cnn.com, it's got to start with smaller sites like my page.
The problem with Netscape 4 is not that it doesn't support CSS (Lynx doesn't support CSS and it renders the page fine). The problem is its half-assed support for CSS. It thinks it understands CSS, but it really doesn't. If AOL/Netscape would just release a version of NS4 that flat-rendered any CSS pages the results would be much more usable. I tried to make sure the page was accessible to text based browsers as a lowest common denominator, and for visually impaired people (although not many of them play Quake I would imagine).
I know a lot of people would be happy with a web that was just black text on a white (or grey for old-schoolers) background, but some of us are intrigued by the possibility of near-pixel-perfect accuracy in web page rendering. It opens up an amazing range of creative possibilities.
There are CSS-compliant browsers available on every major platform today. If you're still using 3 year old technology (Netscape 4) perhaps you should consider upgrading. If you aren't happy with those other browsers, perhaps you should contribute to making them better.
It would not require "infinite" money -- assuming you allow only a-z for characters, and that a TLD is always 3 letters, there are only 17576 possibilites. If each domain is $10 then that's only $175k. Easy for Microsoft (or another big company) to justify if needed.
No, you're wrong. It doesn't matter how the/dev/random numbers are generated.
If you'd read the entire thing you'll see that the bug caused the program to not read ANY (real) data from/dev/random. So whether/dev/random is working or not it doesn't matter.
The page specifically lists Linux as one of the systems that this bug occurs on.
I think the most telling part of the last answer was "So it's the quality, the quality and the scale."
So Metallica does not believe in RIGHT and WRONG. There is no black and white. Just shades of gray. I guess Napster is a little darker than they would like.
Microsoft is taking a LOT of steps to address the NAT issue in DP8 -- all network traffic will go through a single port which is easily routable via NAT. That probably won't do any good for existing games, but at least they are addressing the issue.
Here's what you get on the Netpliance site if you try to sign up now..
By purchasing the i-opener you are agreeing to use the i-opener Internet service. The fee is $21.95 a month and will be billed approximately 2 days after the i-opener is shipped to you. i-opener Internet appliances shipped after March 20, 2000 can no longer be reconfigured in the manner described in recent reports. Modification of the i-opener in any way is in violation of our terms and conditions.
They've got it all now -- an Operating System, an Office Suite, and Development Tools. Obviously their pitch to system vendors is "bundle our whole package, it works best together!"
Not a bad plan... I just hope they keep Win32 Delphi around..
Actually each "work" is a song, and my understanding is that they can actually sue twice per song (once for performance copyright, once for content copyright).. so in the worst case.. figure 10 songs per CD.. 135billion.. pretty bad.. even Bill can't bail em out!
Although I severely doubt they would get hit by anything near that much considering the security measures they have in place -- the worst "damages" the RIAA could probably end up claiming is the revenue MP3.com is deriving from the service (via banner ads and their CD selling partners)
Applying software like EULAs to music
on
RIAA Sues MP3.com
·
· Score: 3
From reading the suit, it appears that the RIAA is trying to obtain software-EULA-like protection for audio CDs. For example, they are saying you can't use the music for commercial purposes at all -- even if you aren't violating copyright(which they are not doing -- only copyright owners can access the material).
Hillary repeatedly refers to the "license" you have to use the Music. I don't remember reading or signing any license agreement before buying a CD! How can they say that usage is governed by any "license" other than standard Copyright law?
Does standard Copyright law prohibit redistribution of copyrighted material to people who already own that copyrighted material? Or is it that (as the RIAA asserts) you never "own" copyrighted material -- the best you can ever do is "license" it -- and what that license is is up to the copyright owner (who apparently doesn't even have to state it before you buy it).
The example I use is this: Radio stations have to pay royalties because they broadcast to people who don't own the copyrighted material. However in the case of my.mp3.com, the content was only being shared with people who already owned the copyrighted material.
Technically mp3.com does NOT profit from the content directly (since the user already owns the content), they profit from the SERVICE they provide (namely, allowing you access to your music library from anywhere).
Obviously this is comes down to interpretation of copyright law, which means this battle will almost definitely end up in court -- and the outcome could be very important to all forms of licensing and copyright control (e.g. EULAs and the UCITA).
On a second note -- I think it's interesting that the RIAA didn't pursue their normal charge of "contributory infringement" like what they are accusing Napster of. For example, I would have expected them to show how one user could upload their CDs, share the account with another user, and allow that user to listen to the music. Now obviously that is a pretty dubious charge, but it's what they typically use against most companies who create tools that make piracy of music very easy. I wonder if this signals a change in their strategy -- a push to assert even MORE control over how copyrighted content is used.
"The keys have no real purpose except to circumvent the locks that stand between the thief and the goods he or she targets"
..except that it isn't the case -- one of the main uses of the decryption "formula" is to allow the use of DVDs on "alternative" operating systems like Linux. Piracy is NOT the only use.
A better analogy would be "someone making keys to a department store that locks their doors and only gives keys to whites (because they are the majority!)"
Here is the fine print from the Best Buy ad -- as you can clearly see it states that CA and OR residents aren't responsible for paying back anything if they cancel!
INSTANTLY SAVE UP TO $400 ON ANY COMPUTER (excludes prior purchases) WHEN YOU SIGN UP IN STORE FOR UP TO 3 YEARS OF MSN INTERNET ACCESS AT JUST $21.95 A MONTH. Details of the MSN Instant Credit Program for Best Buy. The MSN Instant Credit program requires: (1) the purchase of a personal computer, notebook, or built-to-order PC, (excludes prior purchases), totaling in excess of the selected credit amount (sales tax will apply to the total purchase price including mail-in rebates and add-ons, as applicable) from Best Buy between January 2, 1999, and February 29, 2000; (2) selection of a 36-month membership to MSN Internet Access ($400 credit), 24-month membership ($225 credit), or 12-month membership ($100 credit) at the rate of $21.95 per month plus applicable taxes; (3) in-store signup at the time of purchase; (4) a valid major credit card (Visa, MasterCard, Discover/Novus, American Express accepted; Best Buy credit card or debit cards cannot be used with this offer); and (5) acceptance of the MSN Internet Access member agreement. The credit card will be automatically billed $21.95 each month. You are not obligated to continue as an MSN Internet Access member for any particular length of time; however, if for any reason whatsoever you do not continue for the period of time associated with the purchase credit that you have elected to receive, you agree that MSN will charge your credit card for the entire amount of the purchase credit immediately upon termination or cancellation of your MSN Internet Access account; provided that if you are a resident of California or Oregon you will not be required to repay the credit amount. Your social security number is required for processing your credit. You must be 18 years old or older to qualify for the MSN Instant Credit Program. Offer valid only on new MSN account established in store at time of PC purchase. MSN Internet Access is available only to users of the Windows® 95 or 98 operating systems. MSN Internet Access is available only for personal non-commercial use. Local phone and/or long distance toll charges may apply. It is the customer's responsibility to check with a local phone company to determine if access numbers are local. Local market network activity and capacity may affect access availability. MSN is a trademark of Microsoft Corporation. In the event that we are unable to register you for Internet service on the date of purchase, we will offer a mail-in rebate for the same amount. Additional conditions and restrictions apply. See product offer and store for additional details.
The answer to (A) is client CD Keys, as discussed in my earlier post. Obviously this won't work for pure open-source-only games (since it requires you to "buy" something), but since Q1 is an open-source hybrid (as will be Q3 and others if they get released) this scheme can certainly works. It requires that the game be distributed with CD Keys to begin with, but I think you'll see that more often than not, starting with Q3 (especially future id games).
That also is the solution to (B) -- disputes are settled the same way the company settles the normal "he stole my CD key dispute"
The server can never tell what exactly to expect from the client. After all, all players aren't the same. A good player's data will look at lot different than a bad player's data, and a bad player with a good bot will look a lot more like a good player than something totally random. Yes, you should put as much control in the hands of the server as possible -- for example, allow the client to only define it's velocity and orientation, not position, and bounds check those numbers -- but Quake already does this. The problem is bots that make you aim more accurate or turn around faster... not faster than humanly possible, just better than the luser using them. There is a solution for this problem -- but it won't work with Quake. For games that use CD Key systems (like Half-Life) you can ban players on the server by their CD Key. So as soon as you identify a lamer using some kind of bot, you can ban them from your server, and trusted server admins can share their ban lists. This works even in an open source scenario. Why? The server never knows the actual CD Key, just a hash of it. So the server can ban CD Key hashes, and this works as long as clients are required to use a validation server to validate their CD Keys. A hacked client cannot get around the validation server, even if it's open source. (I'd be glad to follow up with any game developers that have questions about it).
There is a very simple, and understandable, reason why the track the info.
As a startup company, your value is determined almost ENTIRELY based on eyeballs -- how many people see and use your product on a daily basis. Number of users X $ per user defines your net worth. Revenue, marketshare, and everything else is secondary.
They are tracking this info so that they can get an accurate count of their number of users. When they say they aren't doing anything else with the data, they are probably telling the truth.
Does it REALLY harm to to transparently have your install of a software logged, as long as it's not traceable to you and doesn't create a burden of any kind?
What we are seeing is software that is finally "learning" from the web. Web sites track every click and every request. Every site on the web gathers FAR more information about you than this silly application. Lets face it, application developers are jealous. They want to know how much their software is being used, and so they've added some simple tracking features. They are NOT invading your privacy (you are running their software) or "using" your computer in any way.
Actually, NT's strengths include ease of administration, volume and breadth of applications, and ease of finding developers & admins, in addition to speed.
40% faster is a bit more than marginal, and in fact, if I could save 40% in horesepower on the $10k servers I buy, I can more than than pay for that NT license.
Linux will always be great for cheap, departmental, non-mission-critical servers where cost is more important than performance anyway. But if you're already pay $10-$20k for a server, another thousand for the NT license is NOT A BIG DEAL (especially if you get better performance). Price matters, but only in relation to total machine cost.
hence one of the biggest complaints about open source -- if the developers don't "feel" like it, it doesn't get done. Try listening to the users and doing what they want for a change. Commercial developers have been doing this for years.
Now I realize most OSS developers DO listen to their users, but the attitude of "it's open source, YOU fix it" just isn't right.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe a buggy release was meant to stress their new auto-update system (Redhat network!) as they release fixes...
Well, at least Microsoft makes Windows Update free :)
Tell them to release the SOURCE for their encoder and player - and then ask people to hack it. If they can't do that (e.g. it's based on security through obscurity) then they it will never be secure.
XBox not up to the level of the Gamecube? That's a joke - the Gamecube is VERY substandard hardware (especially for a 2k1 console). It has less RAM and a slower video processor than the PS2, and FAR less than the XBox (which has nearly 10X the polygon power on paper, and has nearly 3X the memory + a hard drive). The gamecube was originally slated to come out in '99 as a comptetitor to the Dreamcast, and if it had come out then it probably would have been a decent system. As it stands now, it will only survive on the strength of Pokemon.
There are some cool pictures of the 300ft one that collapsed here
Actually Colossus was not created to break Engima, Enigma was broken using the Bombes, which were machines based on a Polish design.
Colossus tacked the much more difficult Lorenz Cipher (aka the Fish cipher) used starting in 1941 for the most important communications between Hitler and his generals.
Really the most amazing thing about Colossus was not that it was a programmable computer (sure that's cool) but that it could read paper teleprinter tape at 30 miles per hour (5k characters per second!). It could operate on 5 tapes in parallel, processing 25k of data per second - about the speed of a broadband connection today!
You're reading the compile time graphs upside down - lower is better for compile time. NetBSD was the best, Linux 2.2 was the worst on that test.
As far as I know, Mac Q3 does not have support for "native" mods like RA3. I'm looking into the possibility of doing a QVM version for Mac, but that may be difficult because of some of RA3's advanced features.
OS X on the other hand should have great support for native mods (through shared libraries) and I plan to support it once available.
If designers continue to cater to the limitations of Netscape 4 the platform will never die and exciting new technologies like CSS and DHTML will not be usable. SOMEONE has to start using those technologies first, to drive up adoption of newer browsers that support these technologies. It's not going to be yahoo.com or cnn.com, it's got to start with smaller sites like my page.
The problem with Netscape 4 is not that it doesn't support CSS (Lynx doesn't support CSS and it renders the page fine). The problem is its half-assed support for CSS. It thinks it understands CSS, but it really doesn't. If AOL/Netscape would just release a version of NS4 that flat-rendered any CSS pages the results would be much more usable. I tried to make sure the page was accessible to text based browsers as a lowest common denominator, and for visually impaired people (although not many of them play Quake I would imagine).
I know a lot of people would be happy with a web that was just black text on a white (or grey for old-schoolers) background, but some of us are intrigued by the possibility of near-pixel-perfect accuracy in web page rendering. It opens up an amazing range of creative possibilities.
There are CSS-compliant browsers available on every major platform today. If you're still using 3 year old technology (Netscape 4) perhaps you should consider upgrading. If you aren't happy with those other browsers, perhaps you should contribute to making them better.
It would not require "infinite" money -- assuming you allow only a-z for characters, and that a TLD is always 3 letters, there are only 17576 possibilites. If each domain is $10 then that's only $175k. Easy for Microsoft (or another big company) to justify if needed.
No, you're wrong. It doesn't matter how the /dev/random numbers are generated.
/dev/random. So whether /dev/random is working or not it doesn't matter.
If you'd read the entire thing you'll see that the bug caused the program to not read ANY (real) data from
The page specifically lists Linux as one of the systems that this bug occurs on.
I think the most telling part of the last answer was "So it's the quality, the quality and the scale."
So Metallica does not believe in RIGHT and WRONG. There is no black and white. Just shades of gray. I guess Napster is a little darker than they would like.
Microsoft is taking a LOT of steps to address the NAT issue in DP8 -- all network traffic will go through a single port which is easily routable via NAT. That probably won't do any good for existing games, but at least they are addressing the issue.
By purchasing the i-opener you are agreeing to use the i-opener Internet service. The fee is $21.95 a month and will be billed approximately 2 days after the i-opener is shipped to you. i-opener Internet appliances shipped after March 20, 2000 can no longer be reconfigured in the manner described in recent reports. Modification of the i-opener in any way is in violation of our terms and conditions.
They've got it all now -- an Operating System, an Office Suite, and Development Tools. Obviously their pitch to system vendors is "bundle our whole package, it works best together!"
Not a bad plan... I just hope they keep Win32 Delphi around..
Actually, according to the prelim injunction ruling, linking to the source is NOT prohibited, just hosting it.
Actually each "work" is a song, and my understanding is that they can actually sue twice per song (once for performance copyright, once for content copyright).. so in the worst case.. figure 10 songs per CD .. 135billion.. pretty bad.. even Bill can't bail em out!
Although I severely doubt they would get hit by anything near that much considering the security measures they have in place -- the worst "damages" the RIAA could probably end up claiming is the revenue MP3.com is deriving from the service (via banner ads and their CD selling partners)
From reading the suit, it appears that the RIAA is trying to obtain software-EULA-like protection for audio CDs. For example, they are saying you can't use the music for commercial purposes at all -- even if you aren't violating copyright(which they are not doing -- only copyright owners can access the material).
Hillary repeatedly refers to the "license" you have to use the Music. I don't remember reading or signing any license agreement before buying a CD! How can they say that usage is governed by any "license" other than standard Copyright law?
Does standard Copyright law prohibit redistribution of copyrighted material to people who already own that copyrighted material? Or is it that (as the RIAA asserts) you never "own" copyrighted material -- the best you can ever do is "license" it -- and what that license is is up to the copyright owner (who apparently doesn't even have to state it before you buy it).
The example I use is this: Radio stations have to pay royalties because they broadcast to people who don't own the copyrighted material. However in the case of my.mp3.com, the content was only being shared with people who already owned the copyrighted material.
Technically mp3.com does NOT profit from the content directly (since the user already owns the content), they profit from the SERVICE they provide (namely, allowing you access to your music library from anywhere).
Obviously this is comes down to interpretation of copyright law, which means this battle will almost definitely end up in court -- and the outcome could be very important to all forms of licensing and copyright control (e.g. EULAs and the UCITA).
On a second note -- I think it's interesting that the RIAA didn't pursue their normal charge of "contributory infringement" like what they are accusing Napster of. For example, I would have expected them to show how one user could upload their CDs, share the account with another user, and allow that user to listen to the music. Now obviously that is a pretty dubious charge, but it's what they typically use against most companies who create tools that make piracy of music very easy. I wonder if this signals a change in their strategy -- a push to assert even MORE control over how copyrighted content is used.
A better analogy would be "someone making keys to a department store that locks their doors and only gives keys to whites (because they are the majority!)"
Here is the fine print from the Best Buy ad -- as you can clearly see it states that CA and OR residents aren't responsible for paying back anything if they cancel!
INSTANTLY SAVE UP TO $400 ON ANY COMPUTER (excludes prior purchases) WHEN YOU SIGN UP IN STORE FOR UP TO 3 YEARS OF MSN INTERNET ACCESS AT JUST $21.95 A MONTH. Details of the MSN Instant Credit Program for Best Buy. The MSN Instant Credit program requires: (1) the purchase of a personal computer, notebook, or built-to-order PC, (excludes prior purchases), totaling in excess of the selected credit amount (sales tax will apply to the total purchase price including mail-in rebates and add-ons, as applicable) from Best Buy between January 2, 1999, and February 29, 2000; (2) selection of a 36-month membership to MSN Internet Access ($400 credit), 24-month membership ($225 credit), or 12-month membership ($100 credit) at the rate of $21.95 per month plus applicable taxes; (3) in-store signup at the time of purchase; (4) a valid major credit card (Visa, MasterCard, Discover/Novus, American Express accepted; Best Buy credit card or debit cards cannot be used with this offer); and (5) acceptance of the MSN Internet Access member agreement. The credit card will be automatically billed $21.95 each month. You are not obligated to continue as an MSN Internet Access member for any particular length of time; however, if for any reason whatsoever you do not continue for the period of time associated with the purchase credit that you have elected to receive, you agree that MSN will charge your credit card for the entire amount of the purchase credit immediately upon termination or cancellation of your MSN Internet Access account; provided that if you are a resident of California or Oregon you will not be required to repay the credit amount. Your social security number is required for processing your credit. You must be 18 years old or older to qualify for the MSN Instant Credit Program. Offer valid only on new MSN account established in store at time of PC purchase. MSN Internet Access is available only to users of the Windows® 95 or 98 operating systems. MSN Internet Access is available only for personal non-commercial use. Local phone and/or long distance toll charges may apply. It is the customer's responsibility to check with a local phone company to determine if access numbers are local. Local market network activity and capacity may affect access availability. MSN is a trademark of Microsoft Corporation. In the event that we are unable to register you for Internet service on the date of purchase, we will offer a mail-in rebate for the same amount. Additional conditions and restrictions apply. See product offer and store for additional details.
The answer to (A) is client CD Keys, as discussed in my earlier post. Obviously this won't work for pure open-source-only games (since it requires you to "buy" something), but since Q1 is an open-source hybrid (as will be Q3 and others if they get released) this scheme can certainly works. It requires that the game be distributed with CD Keys to begin with, but I think you'll see that more often than not, starting with Q3 (especially future id games).
That also is the solution to (B) -- disputes are settled the same way the company settles the normal "he stole my CD key dispute"
The server can never tell what exactly to expect from the client. After all, all players aren't the same. A good player's data will look at lot different than a bad player's data, and a bad player with a good bot will look a lot more like a good player than something totally random. Yes, you should put as much control in the hands of the server as possible -- for example, allow the client to only define it's velocity and orientation, not position, and bounds check those numbers -- but Quake already does this. The problem is bots that make you aim more accurate or turn around faster... not faster than humanly possible, just better than the luser using them. There is a solution for this problem -- but it won't work with Quake. For games that use CD Key systems (like Half-Life) you can ban players on the server by their CD Key. So as soon as you identify a lamer using some kind of bot, you can ban them from your server, and trusted server admins can share their ban lists. This works even in an open source scenario. Why? The server never knows the actual CD Key, just a hash of it. So the server can ban CD Key hashes, and this works as long as clients are required to use a validation server to validate their CD Keys. A hacked client cannot get around the validation server, even if it's open source. (I'd be glad to follow up with any game developers that have questions about it).
There is a very simple, and understandable, reason why the track the info.
As a startup company, your value is determined almost ENTIRELY based on eyeballs -- how many people see and use your product on a daily basis. Number of users X $ per user defines your net worth. Revenue, marketshare, and everything else is secondary.
They are tracking this info so that they can get an accurate count of their number of users. When they say they aren't doing anything else with the data, they are probably telling the truth.
Does it REALLY harm to to transparently have your install of a software logged, as long as it's not traceable to you and doesn't create a burden of any kind?
What we are seeing is software that is finally "learning" from the web. Web sites track every click and every request. Every site on the web gathers FAR more information about you than this silly application. Lets face it, application developers are jealous. They want to know how much their software is being used, and so they've added some simple tracking features. They are NOT invading your privacy (you are running their software) or "using" your computer in any way.
Actually, NT's strengths include ease of administration, volume and breadth of applications, and ease of finding developers & admins, in addition to speed.
40% faster is a bit more than marginal, and in fact, if I could save 40% in horesepower on the $10k servers I buy, I can more than than pay for that NT license.
Linux will always be great for cheap, departmental, non-mission-critical servers where cost is more important than performance anyway. But if you're already pay $10-$20k for a server, another thousand for the NT license is NOT A BIG DEAL (especially if you get better performance). Price matters, but only in relation to total machine cost.
hence one of the biggest complaints about open source -- if the developers don't "feel" like it, it doesn't get done. Try listening to the users and doing what they want for a change. Commercial developers have been doing this for years.
Now I realize most OSS developers DO listen to their users, but the attitude of "it's open source, YOU fix it" just isn't right.