But the photocopier will just put its own watermark in.
One idea would be to print part of the note on one printer and then feed the paper through other printers and print more. Then, you would have grids and watermarks from multiple printers resulting in an unreadable watermark (especially if you print it on multiple identical printers)
My bank (national australia bank) has an optional service where you register your mobile phone number with them. If you have it registered, when you do a transaction, you get a SMS from them with a number that you need to enter into the form before the transaction goes through.
If I ever end up with a mobile phone (and if I am still with the national), I will be enabling this feature myself.
For some kinds of patents, yes, there would be an issue with the "working model" idea.
But, for others, a requirement to produce a "working model" would not be beoynd the capabilities of anyone likely to file one of those patents.
For example, for software patents, the "working model" requirement is not going to force the little guy out.
If you have invented, say, a new compression algorithim, you have to show a working example implementation (compression and decompression or whatever) of your algorithim. Same for other software patents.
That alone would be a good place to start and wouldnt lock anyone out of being able to get patents.
Also, all patent related lawsuits should go to a special patent court (and only to that court). At any time (regardless of any ongoing lawsuits), anyone at all can submit possible prior art to the patent court/patent office for any active patent. If an expert in the field the patent covers determines that it IS prior art, the patent is declared null and void and the patent holder has to pay costs. If it is determined not to be prior art, the person who submitted it as possible prior art has to pay costs.
Also, the patent court would have rules in place to prevent costs from reaching hights so high the little guy cant afford to enforce their patents (mabie if we banned all the lawyers from the patent court, that might help keep costs down)
Microsoft has LOTS of undocumented APIs. Just as an example, RegisterUserAPIHooks and UnRegisterUserAPIHooks in user32.dll which let uxtheme.dll (and the theme APIs) hook into the OS to do global non-client area themeing.
Should they be forced to document these? No, because they are only used by one part of the core OS (uxtheme.dll) to talk to another (user32.dll)
If I am playing a sports or racing game and I am at a real-world track, stadium etc, I expect to see the same ads as you see at the real world track.
Also, for ads like the ones in this article (i.e. ads that actually make money for the developer/publisher) the ads should be for brands that are known around the world and not for "US" brands that the rest of the world doesnt know about (for example, in the new expansion pack for Rollercoaster Tycoon 3, they have this downloadable ads stuff and they have shown an ad for some new show on a US TV station). The acceptable alternative to that would be to have geographically specific advertising and detect location somehow.
They can enforce through hardware locks things like network locking (if you want to use your phone on another network, you have to pay us to get the signed unlock module), picture transfer (if you want to transfer pictures, you have to go through our system), ringtones etc etc.
Although the real answer is simple, dont buy phones with this stuff in it.
Is this actually emulation? Is the emulation code any good? (Is it taken from any known emulators?)
Re:Will Civ 1-3 ever be open sourced?
on
Ask Sid Meier
·
· Score: 1
The source code to Civilisation: Call To Power 2 is available I believe (the licence isnt necessarily as "Free" as some here would like but it IS there). Also, they said the source code to the first CTP game has been lost.
In a true adventure game (ala Day Of The Tenticle or Space Quest or etc) you dont have any real "fighting". There are times when you get killed by something (and fail the game) or kill something (and advance) but usually they are simple "one up" either/or options (either you avoid the alien or you get shot by them) and there is no actual "fighting" involved.
Exactly where does the money being spent on voyager go? I understand some of it has to go to buying time on the Deep Space Network and some to paying people to talk to the probe and listen for answers but what is the actual cost breakdown?
How much would it cost to just collect the data (and publish it on the NASA website or something) without actually paying for all that research stuff to do something with the data?
The simple fact is that the fuding for projects like the latest air-force jet fighter goes into the profits of (and pockets of the executives of) big companies (usually with factories in the district of some congressmen who needs something to help them get re-elected). The funding for projects like Voyager doesnt end up anywhere that benifits congressmen so it wont actually get support.
Maybe if america stopped getting involved in conflicts and wars that are none of their business.
They got involved in a civil war in Korea that was really none of their business.
Then they got involved again in a civil war in vietnam that was also none of their business.
Same thing with iraq. There was no actual evidence at the time when the war started that Saddam or iraq presented any threat to america or its allies (although there were a few people who wanted to make it look like there was to justify a war a lot of people didnt want)
Does the defintion for "BITS" also cover fibre optics, ISDN, T lines, Wireless, Sattelite etc?
the bit about "any devices" sounds good. It means that the providers cant say "you have to use our gear to connect to our cable/DSL connection" or "You cant use routers on our network"
The law was loosened up quite a bit when someone (I cant remember who and google isnt turning up any usefull links) went to challenge the export regulations in the courts (AFAIK it was under freedom of speech where they wanted to be able to share source code for encryption and discuss algorithims and such but were not allowed to by the export regs).
So, presumably the government saw that rather than risk loosing control over encryption completly because of a supreme court decision or something, they decided to just relax the laws.
Given a 3D model file of something objectional (e.g. nudity), there exist ways to put it into many games where there are no official mod tools (including the game that started the debate, Grand Theft Auto)
That they seek to impose a ratings system seperate from the ESRB system.
If this law (and others like it) simply gave legal power to the ESRB system (i.e. restricted the purchase of M and AO games to adults or whatever), I would have no problems with it really.
Its not just about the astronauts, its about the shuttles too. If another shuttle was rendered unusable (even if the crew got to ISS and a lifeboat home), the PR disaster for NASA would be huge.
A classic example of when NASA used to trust intuition was when Apollo 12 got struck by lightning. All the sensors and instruments went haywire but they didnt abort, they trusted the intuition of the guys in mission controll that it was only a computer glitch and could be fixed and that there was no need to abort.
If that happened today, the astronauts would have been told to abort befure they even knew what had happened let alone considered if it was fixable.
I think that GPLv3 should contain something that basicly says that you cant use GPL code if trusted computing or DRM is required in order to use the resulting binary (e.g. if sony were to use GPL code under a GPL with this clause on the PS3 where all code needs to be signed then it would violate this clause)
Code signing done by the end user where they have the keys and can sign whatever they want (e.g. signing done to detect tampering) would not be covered by this.
Slashdot Mirror
But the photocopier will just put its own watermark in.
One idea would be to print part of the note on one printer and then feed the paper through other printers and print more. Then, you would have grids and watermarks from multiple printers resulting in an unreadable watermark (especially if you print it on multiple identical printers)
My bank (national australia bank) has an optional service where you register your mobile phone number with them.
If you have it registered, when you do a transaction, you get a SMS from them with a number that you need to enter into the form before the transaction goes through.
If I ever end up with a mobile phone (and if I am still with the national), I will be enabling this feature myself.
When will AOL merge AIM and ICQ so people on both networks can talk to each other?
For some kinds of patents, yes, there would be an issue with the "working model" idea.
But, for others, a requirement to produce a "working model" would not be beoynd the capabilities of anyone likely to file one of those patents.
For example, for software patents, the "working model" requirement is not going to force the little guy out.
If you have invented, say, a new compression algorithim, you have to show a working example implementation (compression and decompression or whatever) of your algorithim. Same for other software patents.
That alone would be a good place to start and wouldnt lock anyone out of being able to get patents.
Also, all patent related lawsuits should go to a special patent court (and only to that court). At any time (regardless of any ongoing lawsuits), anyone at all can submit possible prior art to the patent court/patent office for any active patent. If an expert in the field the patent covers determines that it IS prior art, the patent is declared null and void and the patent holder has to pay costs. If it is determined not to be prior art, the person who submitted it as possible prior art has to pay costs.
Also, the patent court would have rules in place to prevent costs from reaching hights so high the little guy cant afford to enforce their patents (mabie if we banned all the lawyers from the patent court, that might help keep costs down)
Microsoft has LOTS of undocumented APIs.
Just as an example, RegisterUserAPIHooks and UnRegisterUserAPIHooks in user32.dll which let uxtheme.dll (and the theme APIs) hook into the OS to do global non-client area themeing.
Should they be forced to document these? No, because they are only used by one part of the core OS (uxtheme.dll) to talk to another (user32.dll)
I second the "It must fit with the game" rule.
If I am playing a sports or racing game and I am at a real-world track, stadium etc, I expect to see the same ads as you see at the real world track.
Also, for ads like the ones in this article (i.e. ads that actually make money for the developer/publisher) the ads should be for brands that are known around the world and not for "US" brands that the rest of the world doesnt know about (for example, in the new expansion pack for Rollercoaster Tycoon 3, they have this downloadable ads stuff and they have shown an ad for some new show on a US TV station). The acceptable alternative to that would be to have geographically specific advertising and detect location somehow.
They can enforce through hardware locks things like network locking (if you want to use your phone on another network, you have to pay us to get the signed unlock module), picture transfer (if you want to transfer pictures, you have to go through our system), ringtones etc etc.
Although the real answer is simple, dont buy phones with this stuff in it.
Is this actually emulation?
Is the emulation code any good? (Is it taken from any known emulators?)
The source code to Civilisation: Call To Power 2 is available I believe (the licence isnt necessarily as "Free" as some here would like but it IS there).
Also, they said the source code to the first CTP game has been lost.
Prince Of Persia is NOT a true adventure game.
In a true adventure game (ala Day Of The Tenticle or Space Quest or etc) you dont have any real "fighting". There are times when you get killed by something (and fail the game) or kill something (and advance) but usually they are simple "one up" either/or options (either you avoid the alien or you get shot by them) and there is no actual "fighting" involved.
Exactly where does the money being spent on voyager go?
I understand some of it has to go to buying time on the Deep Space Network and some to paying people to talk to the probe and listen for answers but what is the actual cost breakdown?
How much would it cost to just collect the data (and publish it on the NASA website or something) without actually paying for all that research stuff to do something with the data?
The simple fact is that the fuding for projects like the latest air-force jet fighter goes into the profits of (and pockets of the executives of) big companies (usually with factories in the district of some congressmen who needs something to help them get re-elected). The funding for projects like Voyager doesnt end up anywhere that benifits congressmen so it wont actually get support.
Maybe if america stopped getting involved in conflicts and wars that are none of their business.
They got involved in a civil war in Korea that was really none of their business.
Then they got involved again in a civil war in vietnam that was also none of their business.
Same thing with iraq.
There was no actual evidence at the time when the war started that Saddam or iraq presented any threat to america or its allies (although there were a few people who wanted to make it look like there was to justify a war a lot of people didnt want)
Forget Apple, try Sony.
Sony and the PS3 are a threat to microsoft and their XBOX 360.
I think they already did that after 9/11...
But if the captain is watching the CCTV, who is watching the instruments and flying the plane? (Yes I know they have autopilots but still...)
There is no reason you couldnt build MONO to pass native calls through to WINE or similar.
.NET program makes a call in gdi32.dll, the WINE gdi32 can be used to implement it.
So when the
Does the defintion for "BITS" also cover fibre optics, ISDN, T lines, Wireless, Sattelite etc?
the bit about "any devices" sounds good.
It means that the providers cant say "you have to use our gear to connect to our cable/DSL connection"
or "You cant use routers on our network"
The law was loosened up quite a bit when someone (I cant remember who and google isnt turning up any usefull links) went to challenge the export regulations in the courts (AFAIK it was under freedom of speech where they wanted to be able to share source code for encryption and discuss algorithims and such but were not allowed to by the export regs).
So, presumably the government saw that rather than risk loosing control over encryption completly because of a supreme court decision or something, they decided to just relax the laws.
Not just fantasy either.
What about all the humanoid races in Star Wars, Star Trek and other Sci-Fi shows?
Given a 3D model file of something objectional (e.g. nudity), there exist ways to put it into many games where there are no official mod tools (including the game that started the debate, Grand Theft Auto)
That they seek to impose a ratings system seperate from the ESRB system.
If this law (and others like it) simply gave legal power to the ESRB system (i.e. restricted the purchase of M and AO games to adults or whatever), I would have no problems with it really.
Its not just about the astronauts, its about the shuttles too. If another shuttle was rendered unusable (even if the crew got to ISS and a lifeboat home), the PR disaster for NASA would be huge.
A classic example of when NASA used to trust intuition was when Apollo 12 got struck by lightning.
All the sensors and instruments went haywire but they didnt abort, they trusted the intuition of the guys in mission controll that it was only a computer glitch and could be fixed and that there was no need to abort.
If that happened today, the astronauts would have been told to abort befure they even knew what had happened let alone considered if it was fixable.
I think that GPLv3 should contain something that basicly says that you cant use GPL code if trusted computing or DRM is required in order to use the resulting binary (e.g. if sony were to use GPL code under a GPL with this clause on the PS3 where all code needs to be signed then it would violate this clause)
Code signing done by the end user where they have the keys and can sign whatever they want (e.g. signing done to detect tampering) would not be covered by this.