Although it may be adaptive, as a strain or population, surely no one is claiming that individual virus are able to change in any way?
Imho, science has no place for such literary free license. "The virus is able to mutate rapidly to avoid detection by the immune system, and is also swathed by a near-impenetrable cloak of sugary molecules which block access by antibodies.
But certain parts of the virus must remain relatively unchanged so that it can continue to bind to and enter human cells."
You trust Wikipedia more than the BBC? No, he trusts Wikipedia more than the article summary (which he specifically mentions). If you had actually RTFA, it doesn't make all those stupid claims the summary does.
Imagine, I long back for the time when the summary simply copied parts of the article instead of making up stuff.
Does that mean RMS can be thrown into jail now? Or is it okay since it isn't exactly trade giving away Free things? Or is it even something like Radio "Free" Europe, and he gets paid by the CIA?
It seems to me that the DRM people are basically parasites. They do not create the original source material, they would have no function if the source material did not exist. Hey, just like computer programmers.
the great support for Ogg on Linux PCs into a discussion about MP3 players,
I believe the poster bought up ogg support because you were to think to understand what "tied to" means in the context of DRM'd digital music files. You should consider not thinking, you aren't good at it.
Your joke wasn't particularly funny when you take into account the AC mentioned his music player supported oggs. It was funny when he had to drag the great support for Ogg on Linux PCs into a discussion about MP3 players, you numbskull.
AC: Oh, and just in case you are wondering, my portable music player supports Ogg Vorbis as well...
LT: And dragging along your PC when jogging helps with the exercise.
Idiot. What part of 'portable music player' don't you understand? Whiney Humorless Asshole. What part of the joke didn't you get?
BTW
Ogg vorbis must be the least interoperable format in existence, playing only on amost immeasurably small number of players. Thanks for pointing out that "but my portable music player supports Ogg Vorbis" is the answer you'ld suspect from Whiney Assholes and ACs alike.
The point is you do not have to accept the EULA to use the OSX, thus you are free to install OS X on a VM.
Have you read even read the thread you're responding to? Why would I read the bullshit you write? Look at what you just wrote! A) Yes you do. B) The EULA doesn't say you can't.
You're talking about Mac clones.. it's well known that Mac clones are illegal due to copyright infringement. Going to court when Apple sues you and saying "hey, we can sell whatever we like, and we like selling the TPM chips on our motherboard in exactly the right configuration to run Mac OS X" just won't fly. Not to mention that fact that you'd have to load the TPM chips with the Apple keys, which would also be a copyright violation. You mean the imaginary "Apple keys" for the TPM chips Apple doesn't use...
Doesn't work that way. Apple's EULA states that Mac OS X can only be installed on an Apple branded Macintosh. No generic PC, no virtual machine. Nope, the EULA doesn't mention virtual machine at all - so running it on one should be legal if you run it on a Mac.
117. Limitations on exclusive rights: Computer programs
(a) Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of Copy. -- Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer program provided:
(1) that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program in conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no other manner, or
[emph mine]
It is amazing to me just how many people in this forum believe they have to give up their rights because an EULA tells them to. So what's this got to do Apple's EULA? Maybe you should actually read it for a change?
Ogg vorbis must be the least interoperable format in existence, playing only on amost immeasurably small number of players.
Sorry, but you are wrong. Ogg Vorbis can be played on virtually any PC. The codecs are included by default in most Linux distributions and can be installed very easily in Windows (free download, easy installer). All my Windows machines have the Ogg codecs included. All PCs in the world amount to definitely more than a "small number of players". Oh, and just in case you are wondering, my portable music player supports Ogg Vorbis as well...
And dragging along your PC when jogging helps with the exercise.
Read the article again: if I understood it correctly, this mandatory cooling off period during which returns must be accepted would only apply to content that has interoperability problems. In other words, it is very likely that it would only apply to DRM-protected content.
Ahh, so when I buy something from the iTunes Store (with the ability to listen to a 30 second preview), fully knowing that I can not play it on my Zune without re-ripping it, I can return it because it doesn't work with my Zune. But when I buy an non-DRMed MP3, I'm stuck with it, even if it is not what I wanted to buy? Yeah, I can see how a lack of DRM is something I want.
Well, kind of. Except for the fact that you need a proprietary OS to access it. And proprietary hardware to go with it. It seems if you do not have the correct hardware and try to run this, Apple will sue the shit out of you. Why don't they make this compatable with all versions of FreeBSD, then call it unrestricted? But it would also require somebody to be able to read for comprehension. Since you didn't understand that article, that rules you out anyway.
"Windows Media DRM has had fewer security breaches than Apple's FairPlay, yet WM DRM is licensed out the wazoo: there are more than a dozen companies with WM DRM licenses"
Hmmmm.... could it because no one really cares about downloading wmv files? The point is that if the product sucks, no one will bother even to break into it.
Windows Media has certainly been hacked, but the hacks involve getting a legal license first and then removing the DRM. Isn't that odd - all the "hacks" of FairPlay work the same way!
Windows Media DRM has had fewer security breaches than Apple's FairPlay, yet WM DRM is licensed out the wazoo: there are more than a dozen companies with WM DRM licenses. Hang on... so in this case, where it's a Microsoft product that's fairing better you apparently can being into play the 'well, it's not used on nearly as many devices as the Apple version' shtick. Yet when OSX fares better than Windows in virus threats you aren't allowed to use the exact same and just as legitimate argument that Windows is installed on VASTLY more machines than OSX, and as such is a MUCH greater target for compromise?
How does that work? It doesn't - because it's wrong. Not what you think, no, that Microsoft product that's fairing better is wrong. Every version of WMA DRM has been cracked, Arstechnica just ignored the fact.
This is one of the secrets of Dell. You don't have to just order the off the shelf computer, you can custom configure it to your needs. And you can custom configure it with better processors than the E6400 even.
If you guys weren't still living in the 1980s you'd understand why that is a good thing. Whether 1980s or 2000s, when you change the parts, the price changes. Even if you use a Dell. If you had a brain, you'ld have noticed.
comes with a 1.8 GHz processor with 2MB of cache, instead of the 2.16 GHz with 4MB. It comes with DDR2-533, instead of DDR2-667.
Apple is using the T7400, but the Dell you speak of is the E6400. The T7400 only has a 667 Mhz FSB, whereas the E6400 has a 1066 Mhz FSB. The 4M of cache on the T7400 helps to compensate, but the processors are similar in performance in overall benchmarking.
Before you go matching the specs, you should understand what the specs are. Hell, yeah, wouldn't that be nice - of you. He was talking about a E520 for $850 - no such beast with a E6400. Instead that gets us a E4300. Which does have an 800 MHz FSB.
Also, not all applications require killer hardware. The user may want to route over a DSL line, and typical PC performance is more than adequate for that.
In fact, a PC has so much more performance than the central processor of a typical Cisco router, that in case central processor activity is required the PC will always win hands down. Only the hardware-assisted routing on a Cisco can outperform a PC, but that often does not matter. Sure, but how would this qualify as a "super router"? That's like claiming a PC is a super-computer because most people don't need anything more. Heck, you even admit that a PC will go to its knees when you dare use it for Routing.
Did you actually read what he said? What he said was more like, "if we license FairPlay, when hackers work out how to strip the DRM we won't be able to release a new version to stop them quickly enough, and the record companies will shut down iTMS."
It wouldn't shut down, the major labels would pull their music and iTMS would have the same music that eMusic currently has.
If Jobs hates DRM so much, and if iTMS really does "just barely break even" as mac users like to claim, then why not just drop the major labels and go with eMusic's indie-only model?
I don't see the motivation of keeping the major label's music on the store. Gee, maybe because he sees the iTS as a service to iPod customers and not as a means towards world domination? Nah, that can't be it.
Not to mention that there is pretty little point in doing exactly what eMusic does - not to mention that you would then complain that they were ripping of eMusic.
Well, Sony and EMI sell non-DRMed singles on yahoo's store.. but those same singles are DRMed on Apple's store. Don't you mean "personalized" (IOW tagged to you) songs by the likes of Jessica Simpson? For twice what they cost on the iTS?
Slashdot Mirror
Imho, science has no place for such literary free license. "The virus is able to mutate rapidly to avoid detection by the immune system, and is also swathed by a near-impenetrable cloak of sugary molecules which block access by antibodies.
But certain parts of the virus must remain relatively unchanged so that it can continue to bind to and enter human cells."
Imagine, I long back for the time when the summary simply copied parts of the article instead of making up stuff.
Does that mean RMS can be thrown into jail now? Or is it okay since it isn't exactly trade giving away Free things? Or is it even something like Radio "Free" Europe, and he gets paid by the CIA?
So, I'm not good at not thinking.
Do you think I'm great or merely good at thinking? Thanks for proving my point beyond any doubt.
I believe the poster bought up ogg support because you were to think to understand what "tied to" means in the context of DRM'd digital music files. You should consider not thinking, you aren't good at it.
It was funny when he had to drag the great support for Ogg on Linux PCs into a discussion about MP3 players, you numbskull.
LT: And dragging along your PC when jogging helps with the exercise.
Idiot. What part of 'portable music player' don't you understand? Whiney Humorless Asshole. What part of the joke didn't you get? BTW Ogg vorbis must be the least interoperable format in existence, playing only on amost immeasurably small number of players. Thanks for pointing out that "but my portable music player supports Ogg Vorbis" is the answer you'ld suspect from Whiney Assholes and ACs alike.
The point is you do not have to accept the EULA to use the OSX, thus you are free to install OS X on a VM.
Have you read even read the thread you're responding to? Why would I read the bullshit you write? Look at what you just wrote! A) Yes you do. B) The EULA doesn't say you can't.
The assertion was made that you didn't have the right to copy Apple's software to your HDD or memory without agreeing to Apple's EULA.
However, if you've bought a copy of the program, you're explicitly allowed do so by US copyright law.
Try to keep up. And by the EULA. What's your point?
You mean the imaginary "Apple keys" for the TPM chips Apple doesn't use...
Utter Nonsense (at least in the US):
Looking at United States Code, Chapter 17: [emph mine]
It is amazing to me just how many people in this forum believe they have to give up their rights because an EULA tells them to. So what's this got to do Apple's EULA? Maybe you should actually read it for a change?
Sorry, but you are wrong. Ogg Vorbis can be played on virtually any PC. The codecs are included by default in most Linux distributions and can be installed very easily in Windows (free download, easy installer). All my Windows machines have the Ogg codecs included. All PCs in the world amount to definitely more than a "small number of players". Oh, and just in case you are wondering, my portable music player supports Ogg Vorbis as well...
And dragging along your PC when jogging helps with the exercise.Read the article again: if I understood it correctly, this mandatory cooling off period during which returns must be accepted would only apply to content that has interoperability problems. In other words, it is very likely that it would only apply to DRM-protected content.
Ahh, so when I buy something from the iTunes Store (with the ability to listen to a 30 second preview), fully knowing that I can not play it on my Zune without re-ripping it, I can return it because it doesn't work with my Zune. But when I buy an non-DRMed MP3, I'm stuck with it, even if it is not what I wanted to buy? Yeah, I can see how a lack of DRM is something I want.Well, kind of. Except for the fact that you need a proprietary OS to access it. And proprietary hardware to go with it. It seems if you do not have the correct hardware and try to run this, Apple will sue the shit out of you . Why don't they make this compatable with all versions of FreeBSD, then call it unrestricted?
But it would also require somebody to be able to read for comprehension. Since you didn't understand that article, that rules you out anyway.
Hmmmm.... could it because no one really cares about downloading wmv files? The point is that if the product sucks, no one will bother even to break into it.
Windows Media has certainly been hacked, but the hacks involve getting a legal license first and then removing the DRM. Isn't that odd - all the "hacks" of FairPlay work the same way!
How does that work? It doesn't - because it's wrong. Not what you think, no, that Microsoft product that's fairing better is wrong. Every version of WMA DRM has been cracked, Arstechnica just ignored the fact.
If you guys weren't still living in the 1980s you'd understand why that is a good thing. Whether 1980s or 2000s, when you change the parts, the price changes. Even if you use a Dell. If you had a brain, you'ld have noticed.
"These new iPods will be cheaper than the hallucinogens I snort!"
Apple is using the T7400, but the Dell you speak of is the E6400. The T7400 only has a 667 Mhz FSB, whereas the E6400 has a 1066 Mhz FSB. The 4M of cache on the T7400 helps to compensate, but the processors are similar in performance in overall benchmarking.
Before you go matching the specs, you should understand what the specs are.
Hell, yeah, wouldn't that be nice - of you. He was talking about a E520 for $850 - no such beast with a E6400. Instead that gets us a E4300. Which does have an 800 MHz FSB.
In fact, a PC has so much more performance than the central processor of a typical Cisco router, that in case central processor activity is required the PC will always win hands down. Only the hardware-assisted routing on a Cisco can outperform a PC, but that often does not matter. Sure, but how would this qualify as a "super router"? That's like claiming a PC is a super-computer because most people don't need anything more. Heck, you even admit that a PC will go to its knees when you dare use it for Routing.
It wouldn't shut down, the major labels would pull their music and iTMS would have the same music that eMusic currently has.
If Jobs hates DRM so much, and if iTMS really does "just barely break even" as mac users like to claim, then why not just drop the major labels and go with eMusic's indie-only model?
I don't see the motivation of keeping the major label's music on the store. Gee, maybe because he sees the iTS as a service to iPod customers and not as a means towards world domination? Nah, that can't be it.
Not to mention that there is pretty little point in doing exactly what eMusic does - not to mention that you would then complain that they were ripping of eMusic.
And somehow iTunes was released years after Vista?