Maybe I'll write an app that will flood the airwaves with ping packets, using a random MAC in every ping... Then I can vary the Tx power of each ping, so that their signal strength reading will be out of whack too. So they'll get thousands of unique hits, with signal strength readings all over the map.... (My last project was reading/writing these broadcast packets, so I know how to spoof everything in the packet... evil grin...)
If that's the case, it makes me wonder if any licensing terms of the software was violated. Using tools that is licensed for corporate use, for personal use, is a violation of most licensing terms I've seen... For example, if MSFT licenses Office for your work to use, you technically can't use those licenses to run a copy of it at home. I wonder if the principal would have standing by arguing that the spyware was not properly licensed, thus any evidence obtained with it is invalid.
Yes, I was speaking to AT&T... But, no, that is still HTC's fault... Samsung didn't succumb to AT&T's desires to lock the bootloader. HTC did tho. My guess is that was part of the deal for carrier exclusivity I suppose, but I don't think HTC is doing themselves any favors by locking that phone into a single carrier, and then locking it down so that geeks won't recommend it to their friends...
exactly! I had HTC phones before and loved them, and recommended them to all my friends. I currently have an HTC One X... While I like the phone, the hoops I had to jump through to unlock the bootloader was crazy. And if I ever have to replace my phone, it will most likely come with the updated ROM and hBOOT so that you can't unlock the bootloader. (You have to root first to be able to unlock bootloader. The OTA doesn't have a root exploit, so unless you already unlocked the bootloader, you can't root. So now I am certain that if this phone ever goes kaput, my next phone will be a Samsung, unless the Nexus 4 has LTE, which I heard doesn't... So now I push Samsung with all my friends, instead of HTC. So as a result, a bunch of my friends have Samsung phones now.
I used to think the same thing when I first came out of college... But actually use math quite a bit in my current job. (Software Architect in a research lab)
I use Linear Algebra (which for me, in college comes after Calculus 3), as well as Calculus. You probably will too if you say you want to go into gaming, particularly when you start looking into sensor input. I'm not doing gaming, but I'm looking at sensor input, for things like gesture tracking/recognition, sound analysis, as well as more basic things like looking at accelerometers and magnetometers.
I didn't really use Number Theory directly, (graduate course for me, and I flippin' hated that class), but we do have a Math PHd on staff, and I did have to consult with him a number of times.
I don't think it's that they are trying to nickel and dime you. I think they were trying to reduce cost of the base OS, by not including the licensing fees for MPEG2.
This is, for example, what gives supermarkets the "right" (it isn't a right, you've just given permission) to search your bags where this is stipulated in the conditions of entry.
No, it doesn't work like that. In my freshmen year law class, they teach you that you cannot waiver protected rights. Signs do not form a contract/agreement. One of the cases we looked at was a shopping center that had a sign saying that they are not responsible for damage caused by carts. They cannot ask you to waiver that right, because they are legally responsible for their property, which includes their carts. If you think you can form an agreement that asks somebody to waiver a right, with a simple sign... Try wearing a sign around your neck that says, "By allowing me to enter your store, you are releasing me from all liability from my actions, which includes but is not limited to looting, shoplifting, trespassing, and pillaging." and see if they allow you do rob them blind when you walk into their store...
That's just a sign of a crappy architect. (I consider myself a Software Architect, not a Software Developer). Whenever I design a solution, I work with a usability team, that does user research, I work with a Design Engineer to make sure the UI is appropriate and usable. I also work with Field Engineers that are out in the field. I have to work across all these teams to ensure that my software architecture is well architected.
Before I even draw up an architecture, the first thing I do, is storyboard the user flow with a design engineer, so we can mock up what the user facing portion looks like, then we hand that off to a usability team, that will test the user facing portion. We do it this way, becuase our underlying philosophy is that we can invent the greatest thing since sliced bread, but if our users don't understand how to use it, they aren't going to pony up $$$ to pay for it.
This is also why in our research lab, we don't just think up hoky ideas, because otherwise we end up with a solution looking for a problem... We do user studies, so we actually solve a problem that needs solving...
... someone else will. We have a first to file situation here. This is RIDICULOUSLY dumb on Intel's part. A nice sentiment, better executed by stating, "All fruits of this research must be patented by this foundation we've set up, which allows open, free licensing to anybody and everybody." Defensive patents are the only security you have; non-patent clauses just guarantee somebody other than your allies will patent! Ask Google, specifically whomever wrote the $12.1 billion check to acquire defensive patents from Motorola.
The US is not first to file, it's first to invent. So you don't lose defensive capability just because you don't file, becuase your work will be considered prior-art, which will invalidate any filings made after your research.
So if Windows can bar Lindows and Amazon could bar apple from calling one of it's regional stores Amazon since they are in the same field why can't Apple bar amazon from re-using it's coined app term.
Likewise apple wins because App is a word invented like Xerox.
Actually, MS did not bar Lindows, they ended up settling because they almost lost that one. And for the record, "Windows" does not describe what it is, "An operating system", however "App Store" is precisely that, "A store that sells Apps".
Further, Apple did not invent "App", as even the mark "AppStore" was registered back in 1998 by another company.
That's why you have intelligent infrastructure. I can remotely connect to my bench, and individually set the power state for every electrical outlet on my bench. Likewise, I can set the mapping of all the ethernet ports on my bench, and connect them to any network I want. So if the "computer within a computer" really was hosed, I could just power cycle the electrical port. But in most cases, the computer within a computer has a watchdog timer, that automatically reboots the computer within a computer if it stops responding.
As stated before, many platforms, for example Intel vPro, allow you do reboot, KVM, etc, even if the main OS is bluescreened, crashed, etc. There is a separate "management engine" in the chipset, that maintains an independent network connection. You can remote to the system while it's bluescreened to see what the crashdump looks like, then powercycle it, go into the BIOS, etc. You can even remotely mount virtual boot devices.
People have asked, "But what if you have to reboot the management engine"? There are usually watchdog timers that will auto-reset it if it locks up for some reason, but you can also remote into the infrastructure. For example, in our lab, I can remote over to my bench, and individually power cycle electrical outlets, remap the ethernet ports on my bench to connect to something else, etc.
My office is in the suburbs... And I still have to fight traffic... With that said, even tho my commute is 40 miles each way (I live in the burbs on the opposite side of the metro area), my commute is actually shorter than a bunch of the folks that live really close, because the nicer neighborhoods that are close to work, have terrible freeway access, and have crazy traffic jams on the local streets.
Mod this informative!
If a company like Cisco has a known trademark and Apple can just march in and use the same name for a similar product, then what is the bloody point in all this? To protect the rich, but screw over the less rich?
It get's worse... If you read this article from Cisco, it says Apple even approached Cisco to try to license the trademark "iPhone", but couldn't reach an agreement, and came out with their phone and named it "iPhone" anyways.
Should Apple sue Intel over their i7 Core stuff? And every other iStuff product?
Come to think of it, yes. I'd like that. Maybe then all the retarded iNames would be gone.
Actually, Intel used the "i" prefix long before Apple did... It all started when Intel tried to sue AMD for using "80386" as the name of their processor. Intel couldn't trademark a number, so they changed the name of the processor to "i386" This was before Apple had and products with the "i" prefix...
In fact, in my lab, I have a Cisco VoIP product that was sold as an "iPhone"... This product was also made before Apple released an iPhone. In fact Cisco sued Apple over the use of the iPhone trademark, as Cisco owns and used that trademark since 2000 after acquiring InfoGear.
Processor Speed: Very fast hamsters on well-oiled wheels
Multiple Cores: Many well-oiled wheels
On die memory controllers: dangled cheese
Cache: water trough next to the wheel
L3 Cache: Camelback packs for each hamster
Shared L3 Cache: This is where the real innovation comes in and won't be defined as patent is pending.
Car Analogies:
Processor Speed: Max Engine RPM
Multiple Cores: Number of Cylinders in Engine (or number of gears in transmission)
On Die Memory Controller: Direct-Fuel Injection
Cache: Number of exhaust pipes before the CATs.
L3 Cache: Number of exhaust pipes after the mufflers.
Re:I finally could tell my friend to go to hell
on
Windows 95 Turns 15
·
· Score: 1
>>>What was wrong with DOS as the bootloader?
Nothing in theory but Windows 95/98 were nowhere near as stable as the true 32-bit OS known as Windows NT 3.x/ 4.x. A single crashed program could freeze the whole OS (cooperative tasking rather than preemptive tasking).
Actually..... Windows 95 only cooperatively multi-tasked 16 bit applications. 32 bit applications under Windows 95 were always preemptively multi-tasked.
In most standard bodies that I participate in, there is a clause in the member's agreement that says that anything you disclose/discuss to/with the committee, constitutes IP submission to the committee's patent pool of any IP associated with the topic in discussion. And there is usually a mandatory IP check before the spec is ratified. Any members that fail to declare IP that they wish not to license according to the member's license agreement, lose rights to said IP. I've seen a few cases where IP was later declared before the spec was ratified. In most cases, the company agrees to the licensing terms mandated in the member's agreement. In the once case I've seen where the member refused the licensing terms, their membership in the standard's body was revoked. (Basically they said, agree to the terms you agreed to in the member's agreement, or leave the standard's body. It was then pointed out if they left the standard's body, they would LOSE ALL RIGHTS to any patents that were submitted to the patent pool by other members, because the license agreement is only between the members)
Just to clarify, I believe the reason for this, is because CA only requires this stricter emissions on *new* car purchases... If you live in another state, and than move to CA, as long as the car was registered outside of CA for longer than 90 days, the car is considered *used*. This is the same reason you do not have to pay CA sales tax if you move to california and register your 90 day old or older car.
Thta's only true if you are a resident of california when you purchased the car. If you are moving to california, and you bring your car with you, you DO NOT have to do that... I've done that when I moved to california... The first time, I just had to pay a one time fine... However, when my brother did this, the fine was abolished. At the time, our cars did not have CA emissions, becaues I remember that was an option package when I got the car.
And although many late model cars come with built-in GPS systems these are expensive to upgrade and do not allow any changes while the car is moving (even by the passenger). Their screens can be fabulous but the annoyance of having to pull over and stop if something changes has made several of my friends go buy a Nuvi just so they can get the functionality they want. So all their built-in units do is track and display speed, direction, etc. The turn-by-turn is left up to the stand-alone unit mounted on the windshield.
Actually, only SOME cars don't let you make changes when in motion. Acura, for example, does not care if you are moving, and you can happily use the thing while in motion... I have both built in navigation in almost all my cars, and a couple different hand-held units as well... The built in ones are superior, for one major reason. It does NOT need to have constant GPS signal. If you drive through a downtown area with tall buildings, in a tunnel, etc, the built in navigation will rely on its compass and your car's speed sensors to extrapolate your heading, and continue to function....
My handheld units? They'll stop working until it gets signal again. When I was in SF, I had to drive aimlessly for 20 blocks before my handheld could figure out where I was again, but it would keep cutting out, causing me to miss MANY turns. I tried with 3 different brands of hand-held navigations, and had the same problem with all three. The one built into my cars tho? I never experienced such a problem.... You know how much it sucks to pull out of a parking garage, and your handheld unit doesn't know where you are, and can't find a signal because of the tall buildings, so you drive 20 blocks to get a signal, and then find out you drove 20 blocks in the wrong direction? Soooo much nicer to punch in the same info on my built in navigation, and when I exit the parking structure, the thing already knows which street I'm on, and correctly routes me to my destination, even tho the display shows I have no GPS satellites in view. Then I continue down the street, and it correctly routes me, and correctly tells me when to turn, despite still not having any signal yet....
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe I'll write an app that will flood the airwaves with ping packets, using a random MAC in every ping... Then I can vary the Tx power of each ping, so that their signal strength reading will be out of whack too. So they'll get thousands of unique hits, with signal strength readings all over the map.... (My last project was reading/writing these broadcast packets, so I know how to spoof everything in the packet... evil grin...)
If that's the case, it makes me wonder if any licensing terms of the software was violated. Using tools that is licensed for corporate use, for personal use, is a violation of most licensing terms I've seen... For example, if MSFT licenses Office for your work to use, you technically can't use those licenses to run a copy of it at home. I wonder if the principal would have standing by arguing that the spyware was not properly licensed, thus any evidence obtained with it is invalid.
Yes, I was speaking to AT&T... But, no, that is still HTC's fault... Samsung didn't succumb to AT&T's desires to lock the bootloader. HTC did tho. My guess is that was part of the deal for carrier exclusivity I suppose, but I don't think HTC is doing themselves any favors by locking that phone into a single carrier, and then locking it down so that geeks won't recommend it to their friends...
exactly! I had HTC phones before and loved them, and recommended them to all my friends. I currently have an HTC One X... While I like the phone, the hoops I had to jump through to unlock the bootloader was crazy. And if I ever have to replace my phone, it will most likely come with the updated ROM and hBOOT so that you can't unlock the bootloader. (You have to root first to be able to unlock bootloader. The OTA doesn't have a root exploit, so unless you already unlocked the bootloader, you can't root. So now I am certain that if this phone ever goes kaput, my next phone will be a Samsung, unless the Nexus 4 has LTE, which I heard doesn't... So now I push Samsung with all my friends, instead of HTC. So as a result, a bunch of my friends have Samsung phones now.
I used to think the same thing when I first came out of college... But actually use math quite a bit in my current job. (Software Architect in a research lab) I use Linear Algebra (which for me, in college comes after Calculus 3), as well as Calculus. You probably will too if you say you want to go into gaming, particularly when you start looking into sensor input. I'm not doing gaming, but I'm looking at sensor input, for things like gesture tracking/recognition, sound analysis, as well as more basic things like looking at accelerometers and magnetometers. I didn't really use Number Theory directly, (graduate course for me, and I flippin' hated that class), but we do have a Math PHd on staff, and I did have to consult with him a number of times.
I don't think it's that they are trying to nickel and dime you. I think they were trying to reduce cost of the base OS, by not including the licensing fees for MPEG2.
This is, for example, what gives supermarkets the "right" (it isn't a right, you've just given permission) to search your bags where this is stipulated in the conditions of entry.
No, it doesn't work like that. In my freshmen year law class, they teach you that you cannot waiver protected rights. Signs do not form a contract/agreement. One of the cases we looked at was a shopping center that had a sign saying that they are not responsible for damage caused by carts. They cannot ask you to waiver that right, because they are legally responsible for their property, which includes their carts. If you think you can form an agreement that asks somebody to waiver a right, with a simple sign... Try wearing a sign around your neck that says, "By allowing me to enter your store, you are releasing me from all liability from my actions, which includes but is not limited to looting, shoplifting, trespassing, and pillaging." and see if they allow you do rob them blind when you walk into their store...
That's just a sign of a crappy architect. (I consider myself a Software Architect, not a Software Developer). Whenever I design a solution, I work with a usability team, that does user research, I work with a Design Engineer to make sure the UI is appropriate and usable. I also work with Field Engineers that are out in the field. I have to work across all these teams to ensure that my software architecture is well architected.
Before I even draw up an architecture, the first thing I do, is storyboard the user flow with a design engineer, so we can mock up what the user facing portion looks like, then we hand that off to a usability team, that will test the user facing portion. We do it this way, becuase our underlying philosophy is that we can invent the greatest thing since sliced bread, but if our users don't understand how to use it, they aren't going to pony up $$$ to pay for it.
This is also why in our research lab, we don't just think up hoky ideas, because otherwise we end up with a solution looking for a problem... We do user studies, so we actually solve a problem that needs solving...
... someone else will. We have a first to file situation here. This is RIDICULOUSLY dumb on Intel's part. A nice sentiment, better executed by stating, "All fruits of this research must be patented by this foundation we've set up, which allows open, free licensing to anybody and everybody." Defensive patents are the only security you have; non-patent clauses just guarantee somebody other than your allies will patent! Ask Google, specifically whomever wrote the $12.1 billion check to acquire defensive patents from Motorola.
The US is not first to file, it's first to invent. So you don't lose defensive capability just because you don't file, becuase your work will be considered prior-art, which will invalidate any filings made after your research.
So if Windows can bar Lindows and Amazon could bar apple from calling one of it's regional stores Amazon since they are in the same field why can't Apple bar amazon from re-using it's coined app term.
Likewise apple wins because App is a word invented like Xerox.
Actually, MS did not bar Lindows, they ended up settling because they almost lost that one. And for the record, "Windows" does not describe what it is, "An operating system", however "App Store" is precisely that, "A store that sells Apps".
Further, Apple did not invent "App", as even the mark "AppStore" was registered back in 1998 by another company.
That's why on my Android phone, instead of using VPN, I use SSH, and set it to do a local port redirect, so I can just tunnel all my traffic over it.
That's why you have intelligent infrastructure. I can remotely connect to my bench, and individually set the power state for every electrical outlet on my bench. Likewise, I can set the mapping of all the ethernet ports on my bench, and connect them to any network I want. So if the "computer within a computer" really was hosed, I could just power cycle the electrical port. But in most cases, the computer within a computer has a watchdog timer, that automatically reboots the computer within a computer if it stops responding.
As stated before, many platforms, for example Intel vPro, allow you do reboot, KVM, etc, even if the main OS is bluescreened, crashed, etc. There is a separate "management engine" in the chipset, that maintains an independent network connection. You can remote to the system while it's bluescreened to see what the crashdump looks like, then powercycle it, go into the BIOS, etc. You can even remotely mount virtual boot devices.
People have asked, "But what if you have to reboot the management engine"? There are usually watchdog timers that will auto-reset it if it locks up for some reason, but you can also remote into the infrastructure. For example, in our lab, I can remote over to my bench, and individually power cycle electrical outlets, remap the ethernet ports on my bench to connect to something else, etc.
Broadband, cellphone, electricity/heat/gas/etc. These things add up. Not to mention printer paper, ink, etc.
My office is in the suburbs... And I still have to fight traffic... With that said, even tho my commute is 40 miles each way (I live in the burbs on the opposite side of the metro area), my commute is actually shorter than a bunch of the folks that live really close, because the nicer neighborhoods that are close to work, have terrible freeway access, and have crazy traffic jams on the local streets.
Mod this informative! If a company like Cisco has a known trademark and Apple can just march in and use the same name for a similar product, then what is the bloody point in all this? To protect the rich, but screw over the less rich?
It get's worse... If you read this article from Cisco, it says Apple even approached Cisco to try to license the trademark "iPhone", but couldn't reach an agreement, and came out with their phone and named it "iPhone" anyways.
Isn't that willful infringement?
Apples had 'cores' before 1985 ... heck, I seem to remember them as a kid back in the 60's. Rumor has it they go way back.
The Sun had a Core 4 billion years ago, long before an apple even existed.
Should Apple sue Intel over their i7 Core stuff? And every other iStuff product? Come to think of it, yes. I'd like that. Maybe then all the retarded iNames would be gone.
Actually, Intel used the "i" prefix long before Apple did... It all started when Intel tried to sue AMD for using "80386" as the name of their processor. Intel couldn't trademark a number, so they changed the name of the processor to "i386" This was before Apple had and products with the "i" prefix...
In fact, in my lab, I have a Cisco VoIP product that was sold as an "iPhone"... This product was also made before Apple released an iPhone. In fact Cisco sued Apple over the use of the iPhone trademark, as Cisco owns and used that trademark since 2000 after acquiring InfoGear.
I'm more excited about the 10 fold increase in capacity of this new silicon cathode than I am of the fact that it's sprayable, etc...
Processor Speed: Very fast hamsters on well-oiled wheels Multiple Cores: Many well-oiled wheels On die memory controllers: dangled cheese Cache: water trough next to the wheel L3 Cache: Camelback packs for each hamster Shared L3 Cache: This is where the real innovation comes in and won't be defined as patent is pending.
Car Analogies:
Processor Speed: Max Engine RPM
Multiple Cores: Number of Cylinders in Engine (or number of gears in transmission)
On Die Memory Controller: Direct-Fuel Injection
Cache: Number of exhaust pipes before the CATs.
L3 Cache: Number of exhaust pipes after the mufflers.
>>>What was wrong with DOS as the bootloader?
Nothing in theory but Windows 95/98 were nowhere near as stable as the true 32-bit OS known as Windows NT 3.x/ 4.x. A single crashed program could freeze the whole OS (cooperative tasking rather than preemptive tasking).
Actually..... Windows 95 only cooperatively multi-tasked 16 bit applications. 32 bit applications under Windows 95 were always preemptively multi-tasked.
In most standard bodies that I participate in, there is a clause in the member's agreement that says that anything you disclose/discuss to/with the committee, constitutes IP submission to the committee's patent pool of any IP associated with the topic in discussion. And there is usually a mandatory IP check before the spec is ratified. Any members that fail to declare IP that they wish not to license according to the member's license agreement, lose rights to said IP. I've seen a few cases where IP was later declared before the spec was ratified. In most cases, the company agrees to the licensing terms mandated in the member's agreement. In the once case I've seen where the member refused the licensing terms, their membership in the standard's body was revoked. (Basically they said, agree to the terms you agreed to in the member's agreement, or leave the standard's body. It was then pointed out if they left the standard's body, they would LOSE ALL RIGHTS to any patents that were submitted to the patent pool by other members, because the license agreement is only between the members)
Not sure how JEDEC works...
Just to clarify, I believe the reason for this, is because CA only requires this stricter emissions on *new* car purchases... If you live in another state, and than move to CA, as long as the car was registered outside of CA for longer than 90 days, the car is considered *used*. This is the same reason you do not have to pay CA sales tax if you move to california and register your 90 day old or older car.
Thta's only true if you are a resident of california when you purchased the car. If you are moving to california, and you bring your car with you, you DO NOT have to do that... I've done that when I moved to california... The first time, I just had to pay a one time fine... However, when my brother did this, the fine was abolished. At the time, our cars did not have CA emissions, becaues I remember that was an option package when I got the car.
And although many late model cars come with built-in GPS systems these are expensive to upgrade and do not allow any changes while the car is moving (even by the passenger). Their screens can be fabulous but the annoyance of having to pull over and stop if something changes has made several of my friends go buy a Nuvi just so they can get the functionality they want. So all their built-in units do is track and display speed, direction, etc. The turn-by-turn is left up to the stand-alone unit mounted on the windshield.
Actually, only SOME cars don't let you make changes when in motion. Acura, for example, does not care if you are moving, and you can happily use the thing while in motion... I have both built in navigation in almost all my cars, and a couple different hand-held units as well... The built in ones are superior, for one major reason. It does NOT need to have constant GPS signal. If you drive through a downtown area with tall buildings, in a tunnel, etc, the built in navigation will rely on its compass and your car's speed sensors to extrapolate your heading, and continue to function....
My handheld units? They'll stop working until it gets signal again. When I was in SF, I had to drive aimlessly for 20 blocks before my handheld could figure out where I was again, but it would keep cutting out, causing me to miss MANY turns. I tried with 3 different brands of hand-held navigations, and had the same problem with all three. The one built into my cars tho? I never experienced such a problem.... You know how much it sucks to pull out of a parking garage, and your handheld unit doesn't know where you are, and can't find a signal because of the tall buildings, so you drive 20 blocks to get a signal, and then find out you drove 20 blocks in the wrong direction? Soooo much nicer to punch in the same info on my built in navigation, and when I exit the parking structure, the thing already knows which street I'm on, and correctly routes me to my destination, even tho the display shows I have no GPS satellites in view. Then I continue down the street, and it correctly routes me, and correctly tells me when to turn, despite still not having any signal yet....