No, they are removing Java support because they didn't want to comply to the standards. The court said "You need to replace your JVM with one that complies with the standards set by Sun" not "You can't support Java on your OS". All they need to do is follow standards for once, but this is MS so their solution is to instead design their own Java-Like Langauge that only runs on windows rather than make their JVM comply to the standards.
I don't care if he helped open source or not. The simple facts are the United States has no jurisdiction to arrest him. (note period) Just because someone doesn't support open source doesn't mean they should be arrested for a crime that they did not commit (if it wasn't done on US soil it wasn't illegal and thus not a crime), if they should then I expect the programmers and CEOs of all major software companies to be placed under arrest for crimes they did not commit. I beleive in Open Source but this is a completely seperate issue. And yes the publishers were made to feel comfortable releasing books with adobe product, too bad the product was flawed and not even close to safe. Companies shouldn't feel safe because the truth is suppressed by bad laws, they should feel safe because their works are truly safe. Dmitry did not create the flaw, he just exposed it, which will force Adobe to make a better product that will actually protect the works of authors, damn him for not allowing Adobe to lie about the "security" of their product and deceive publishers into using a faulty product, damn him to hell.....
Fact #1: Dmitry lives in Russia and thus is subject only to Russian and International laws
Fact #2: Dmitry designed his program and allowed it to be sold, while he was in Russia.
Fact #3: The DMCA is neither a Russian or an international law.
Fact #4: Dmitry came to the United States simply to DISCUSS the flaws in Adobes encryption.
Fact #5: Dmitry did not violate any laws while in the United States.
Fact #6: United States laws are not international laws.
Fact #7: The United Staes does not have international jurisdiction.
Fact #8: If I travel from New York (where private citizens using fireworks is illegal) to another state (where it is not) and buy and use fireworks while there, I can not be arrested when I return to New York simply for using fireworks where it is legal.
Conclusion: A Russian citizen wrote a program while in Russia that woud not have been legal to write if he had been a United States citizen or was in the United States at that time. This Russian citizen then visited the United States and, while he was there, broke no laws. The FBI, a United States law enforcement agency, placed him under arrest for violation of a law he had not violated. Since the "crime" was committed in Russia, where it is not a crime, the United States has no right to persecute or prosecute Dmitry. My conclusion is supported by my last fact (Fact #8).
Final Thoughts: Though I personally believe the DMCA is wrong, the reason Dmitry should be freed has nothing to do with the DMCA being wrong but with the fact that he did not violate the DMCA because he was not subject to United States law when his "criminal" activity occurred. The United States (which I am currently a citizen of) is setting a dangerous precedent which may backfire. An example of such a backfire would be a United States citizen who places an article on the web, while in the United States, insulting the dictator of a third world country (assume this is illegal in the third world country). This man later visits this third world country and while there says nothing negative about the dictator, but is arrested because while he was in the United states he made negative statements. If the United States convicts Dmitry or even holds him for much longer, any action they would take against this country would be hypocritical.
Sun simply told Microsoft that Java would NOT be "embraced and extended", that their Java tools had to be compatible with the standards Sun set. Microsoft got pissy about not being able to make an MS Java that was only compatible with windows (forcing companies to block out other OSs or code more because most internet users are windows Users) and decided to come up with C# to kill Java. Suprised that all the Java programmers did not instantly flock to C# (after all it IS made by MS) they decided to take all Java support out of XP and force a large download for users that want Java. MS hopes this move will for webpage designers to use MS langauges rather than Java, thus accomplishign the same objective they had before....stop other OS users from using the web effectively.
He stole my AIDS example waaaaa, that was my IP I'm gonna sue:) Ok now it's time to be serious:(
I think there are quite a few intersting points made in this well written article. First of all I agree with him on the fact that content providers should get paid and that the companies that help them distribute their product should get compensated. I also beleive that IP holders should not be able to use their patents and copyrights in a manner that is not in the interests of the majority, such as the with-holding of AIDS medication. My solution would be a combination of extremely short-term patents (a few years depending on the circumstances) and Common Decency Laws which make using your patents or copyrights in a manor that will harm a large number individuals (such as forcing an AIDS medicine to be withhoeld from needy people) illegal and grounds for the cancellation of your patents/copyrights. Rather than using your legal clout and "technical genius" (like Macromedia, lol) to stop piracy, a company should simply make copyright compliance easier than piracy (this could be done with lowering of excessive prices, adding of "hard" (poster, stickers or similar items...sickos I know what you were thinking) items to your purchases, warranties, etc. For example if I want to back-up my CDs right now I need to either burn them or buy a new full price album. If a better solution was offered, such as CD copying for 4-5 dollars, I might decide to not buy a burner because it's cheaper and better quality to pay for their services. In the eend it's all about forcing companies to "play fair" while still making it worthwhile for them to develop products. Will this ever happen? I don't think so, corporations wield to much power now for them to ever give it up. Just my opinion.
to get away from Microsoft. I really hate Microsoft, IMHO their products are over-rated and extremely buggy and their business practices make me sick. Microsoft basically destroyed Netscape (which at one time a much better browser) using their monopoly powers and I have a feeling if they become the only browser supplier they are going to tie their browser to their ISP (they've already started to) making MSN the only option for stable web-browsing. Then simply make MSN even more incompatible with Linux (does anyone know how to configure ppp on linux (in console) to support the knew MSN Explorer style MSN ?) and make it exremely hard to get online with Linux. That is why I am glad there are competing browsers, as long as they have to compete with the others MS can't do anything that may anger their browser users yet.
Finally, a news article that was not innacurate or written specifically to cause panic. I don't know how many average people will read this article but I hope quite a few do. The more of these truthful (a nasty word in most of the press) articles the better, in fact I would encourage all of you to write to this man thnaking him for the article and to link to the page if you have a website. Maybe if he gets enough positive mail, and the page gets enough hits, Time will let him write more major articles. A little truth in the press can't hurt Linux or the Open Source movement.
Open Source needs several things if it is going to become a MAJOR influence on the programming world.
First, the "unsexy" work needs to get done. The problem is, people who are not getting payed can not be forced to do the "boring" work. An easy solution for this problem would be finding a way to give people who work on certain listed projects credit for their work. Maybe a website with a list of boring but neccessary projects, anyone who submits code for those projects will have their name listed next to their contribution, a donations page would also be a good idea.
Open Source also needs one BIG cross-platform application that EVERYONE will have to use, something absolutely huge. This will draw attention to the Open Source movement, a lot of attention.
Finally, Open Source needs to take a page from the "Book of Proven Corporate Tactics" and start spewing (like the exorcist chick) large amounts of propaganda. If Joe sixpack can be scared into looking into Open Source projects by horror stories of proprietary software then thats what we need. A news webpage of some type that is linked to by several major sites and a bunch of volunteer "scare" reporters should suffice.
Oh yeah, one last thing. Open Source NEEDS CODE. (note period)
I'm sorry to say this but unfortunately very few home-users are going to buy a system with Linux pre-installed. Many linux users build their own system, others prefer to buy a windows system and simply place Linux on a partition so that they can boot to windows if they want to play a game thats not available on Linux, finally many Linux users have to share their computer with others who want Windows installed. I would estimate that 70-80 percent of all home Linux users fall in to those categories, maybe more. I don't particularly like Dell (or any major OEM) but it's obvious to me why they had to stop shipping out home Linux systems.
OK, I've explained te difference several times already, but what the hell I'll say it again. the difference is that the linux kernal and the distrobution are not connected in the business sense. With Linux you can get the plain kernal if you want it, or you can choose to use distrobution with software pre-installed, with Windows you can not. Windows is made by M$, Internet Explorer is made by Microsoft, Microsoft is using it's monopoly powers to force people to have Internet Explorer (which for most people means they use IE). If IE was made by company X and company X payed M$ to put IE in windows, then that would not be illegal because Netscape could also pay M$ to include Navigator. As for KDE, KDE is a GUI not an OS. You do not need KDE to run Linux, if you want another GUI you can install it, try running Windows without the GUI (impossible) or replacing the GUI with another (impossible). The problem with MSs tactics is that it is integrating its own sofware with its own OS, thus giving their product an unfair advantage over competitiors. Since the Linux Kernal is completely different from the Linux Distro and any GUIs that might be used, it is a completely different subject. Now if KDE came built directly into the Kernal and you could not uninstall it and use Gnome, that would be illegal.
hmmm, or maybe thats why they first released it in countries where the consumer is not protected by the law as well as they are in the US. By the way, if I have 4 Elvis CDs and I take 3 songs from each CD and burn them onto one CD for my personal use, that is not illegal and yes it is an "Elvis compilation". Acutally fair use does not even sau they have to make it easy for you to copy, only that they can't sue you for copying....but if I make a copy then I'm not doing anything ilegal....if they put noise in their CD that will destroy my equipment and do not properly label it...that is illegal. Also, their technology relies on CD players auto-correcting errors to get rid of the noise.....maybe an older or cheap CD player wouldn't correct the errors as well, wouldn't you agree thats a possibility? As for having lawyers....if lawyers never made mistakes I guess that all the lawsuits against companies going on right now are BS, after all ow could any company with lawyers ever do something illegal when their lawyers would obviously tell them not to....your logic is as flawed as your personality. Learn to read and express your opinions in an intelligent manner, then you can start posting to/. again.
Ever hear of fair use laws? Copying CDs you bought for personal use IS NOT ILLEGAL, and the fact is on older cd players and maybe even on newer ones the original CD COULD DAMAGE THE EQUIPMENT. I usually don't flame flamers but people who conveniantly ignore the facts of a story deserve it, either you knew about fair use and ignored it, or you don't read any of the other 10,000 posts that mention it. Copying a CD and selling/giving it to another is illegal, not just copying it.
Thats right, I am now using "The Executioner" to stop people who may steal my car. The system is very simple, when I press the Skull Button on my keychain a large amount of electricity is allowed to run rampant over the surface of my car. Anyone who comes into contact with the surface of my car is instantly fried. Yes accidental contact may occur as well as legal contact (a police officer issuing a ticket) but as long as there are thieves who would take my car, I feel I am within my rights to protect my property. In order to demostarte this product effectively I have randomly placed 100,000 cars of different makes and models all over the US, in order to maximize the effect several are parked illegally in various ways.
If you in any way questioned the legality or ethical implications of the product mentioned above then you can not support this copy-protection or you are a hypocrite.
On a side note, whats to stop me from playing a CD into the microphone of my computer and recording each track as a.wav file, then burning it? I know it would supposedly decrease the quality, but from what I'm hearing it sounds like they are already doing that themselves. These companies need to realize that THEY WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO STOP US FROM COPYING AUDIO MEDIA. Give up and start putting special items, such as posters and stickers, into the CD cases of your Albums to encourage people to buy them.....you can't burn a poster.
Actually, I purposefully used inproper grammar in that statement for a comedic effect. I am actually very good at English, even though I do not do the homework, so good, in fact, that I recently scored a 730 out of a possible 800 on the Verbal section of the SAT. In short, do not judge a persons intelligence by their posts on a web forum, they may simply prefer using common vernacular.
I'm a high-school (and a lazy dont do no homework one at that) student so I of course have some of the best stories, but I'll only share the ones that won't get me drawn and quartered if one of my teachers/enemy students happens to read this. I found out I had a health project due ten minutes before it was due (I don't listen in stupid classes), it was a collage on healthy food. On the way in the door I grabbed three projects out of the trash right outside the classroom, ripped off a few pictures from two of the posterboards they were on, licked them and slapped them on top of a few pictures on the third poster-board:) I got an A+.
As long as you don't sell it before it's actually completed and don't use your "fake" demo to belittle other companies that make similar products that don't have your "fake" feature until the "fake" feature becomes a real one. And if it's a competitors product with duct-tape over the label then no it's not OK unles you state that it's a competitors product with duct tape over the label.
Glad to see that the billions(?) of dollars Macrovision put into researching their new copyright protection technique (purposefully damaging the CD so it emits noise....absolute genius) payed off. I mean they delayed burning for a whole 2 weeks, that probably saved them -1,999,999,999 dollars. You cannot stop the copying of audio or video media.....hmmm lets see, set my PC to record a.wav file and link the headphone jack of my CD player to the microphone jack, or just play the CD really loud and use a computer microphone to record it.....yeah it sacrifices quality but so does purposefully inserting loud static hisses on to the CD. Give it up and concentrate on making your products better so they will actually be worth the money you charge, use your copy-protection money to put posters and special things inside albums to encourage buying the original, that might actually work.
you'll feel differently when a radio station decides to charge a subscription fee and it becomes illegal for you to have a radio that can receive station xxx.xx . How is this situation different from the direct TV situation? both services broadcast information through the air, one just has pictures. What should happen is Direct TV should charge stations that want to be included on Direct TV, the stations should charge companies for advertising, and the end-user should get the service for free (of course he'll have to watch advertisements. How about if I decide the Direct TV signal is annoying and I don't want it in my home, shouldn't they have to find a way to get it out of there. Your last statements are flawed because I don't purposefully reflect light, it just happens, and as for sound....if I'm too loud I beleive you can call the police for disturbing the peace.
ha our triple-super-duper-protection device will foil you!!!
Oh yeah, the Z34Vfds3 shreds your protection HAR HAR HAR!!!
ahh-haa!! quadruple-super-dee-duper protection device 4943jffj$, try to stop this!!!!!
Oh jeez, it took 25 minutes for my pet chimpanzee to figure out a work-arround with his model: sld2383D slide ruler....but my parrot had to help him, so I guess you made progress
hmmmm, let's get them arrested. HAHAHA.
Jeez, you got two of us, out of 3 million....good job.
now repeat from the beginning accept change the letter/numbers of the devices arround and add a few dee-dupers.....Piracy will continue no matter what, accept it and concentrate on making your products better, nothing has worked yet and nothing ever will.
completely ignoring the Sklyarov situation. Actually, it doesn't suprise me at all, but thats because I have discovered the secret media equations..... Virus = bad hacker = ratings , Dmitry = innocent = bad U.S = not blindly patriotic = bad ratings/disbelief , I'd give the rest of the equations including how to calculate the honesty and accuracy of all news stories....but I want to keep them a secret HAHAHAHA.....
To: you@you.com
From: MadMan2002@techie.com
I am sending this to you in order to have your advice.
I'll bet the farm when the Radeon 2 comes out it will be cheaper than the GeForce 3 was when it came out. Also the 1st generation Radeon isn't that far below the GeForce 3, most gamer sites I've seen reccomen getting the Radeon over the GeForce three or waiting for the price to go down, which of course is moot since I am getting a GeForce 3, I just think saying ATI card are overpriced crap is a little extreme and a lt inaccurate.
I was talking about straight from a major store chain, where Joe Sixpack generally gets his card. At pricewatch I could get an ATI Radeon 64MB DDR for under $150. But then I'd probably spend hundreds of dollars on cooling equipment so I could seriously overclock it without frying the damn thing. Anyway since I just realized my lawsuit money all goes into a trust which will take a while to break, I'll probably end up getting a GeForce 10 by the time I get my money:)
Slashdot Mirror
No, they are removing Java support because they didn't want to comply to the standards. The court said "You need to replace your JVM with one that complies with the standards set by Sun" not "You can't support Java on your OS". All they need to do is follow standards for once, but this is MS so their solution is to instead design their own Java-Like Langauge that only runs on windows rather than make their JVM comply to the standards.
I don't care if he helped open source or not. The simple facts are the United States has no jurisdiction to arrest him. (note period) Just because someone doesn't support open source doesn't mean they should be arrested for a crime that they did not commit (if it wasn't done on US soil it wasn't illegal and thus not a crime), if they should then I expect the programmers and CEOs of all major software companies to be placed under arrest for crimes they did not commit. I beleive in Open Source but this is a completely seperate issue. And yes the publishers were made to feel comfortable releasing books with adobe product, too bad the product was flawed and not even close to safe. Companies shouldn't feel safe because the truth is suppressed by bad laws, they should feel safe because their works are truly safe. Dmitry did not create the flaw, he just exposed it, which will force Adobe to make a better product that will actually protect the works of authors, damn him for not allowing Adobe to lie about the "security" of their product and deceive publishers into using a faulty product, damn him to hell.....
Fact #1: Dmitry lives in Russia and thus is subject only to Russian and International laws
Fact #2: Dmitry designed his program and allowed it to be sold, while he was in Russia.
Fact #3: The DMCA is neither a Russian or an international law.
Fact #4: Dmitry came to the United States simply to DISCUSS the flaws in Adobes encryption.
Fact #5: Dmitry did not violate any laws while in the United States.
Fact #6: United States laws are not international laws.
Fact #7: The United Staes does not have international jurisdiction.
Fact #8: If I travel from New York (where private citizens using fireworks is illegal) to another state (where it is not) and buy and use fireworks while there, I can not be arrested when I return to New York simply for using fireworks where it is legal.
Conclusion: A Russian citizen wrote a program while in Russia that woud not have been legal to write if he had been a United States citizen or was in the United States at that time. This Russian citizen then visited the United States and, while he was there, broke no laws. The FBI, a United States law enforcement agency, placed him under arrest for violation of a law he had not violated. Since the "crime" was committed in Russia, where it is not a crime, the United States has no right to persecute or prosecute Dmitry. My conclusion is supported by my last fact (Fact #8).
Final Thoughts: Though I personally believe the DMCA is wrong, the reason Dmitry should be freed has nothing to do with the DMCA being wrong but with the fact that he did not violate the DMCA because he was not subject to United States law when his "criminal" activity occurred. The United States (which I am currently a citizen of) is setting a dangerous precedent which may backfire. An example of such a backfire would be a United States citizen who places an article on the web, while in the United States, insulting the dictator of a third world country (assume this is illegal in the third world country). This man later visits this third world country and while there says nothing negative about the dictator, but is arrested because while he was in the United states he made negative statements. If the United States convicts Dmitry or even holds him for much longer, any action they would take against this country would be hypocritical.
Sun simply told Microsoft that Java would NOT be "embraced and extended", that their Java tools had to be compatible with the standards Sun set. Microsoft got pissy about not being able to make an MS Java that was only compatible with windows (forcing companies to block out other OSs or code more because most internet users are windows Users) and decided to come up with C# to kill Java. Suprised that all the Java programmers did not instantly flock to C# (after all it IS made by MS) they decided to take all Java support out of XP and force a large download for users that want Java. MS hopes this move will for webpage designers to use MS langauges rather than Java, thus accomplishign the same objective they had before....stop other OS users from using the web effectively.
He stole my AIDS example waaaaa, that was my IP I'm gonna sue :) Ok now it's time to be serious :(
I think there are quite a few intersting points made in this well written article. First of all I agree with him on the fact that content providers should get paid and that the companies that help them distribute their product should get compensated. I also beleive that IP holders should not be able to use their patents and copyrights in a manner that is not in the interests of the majority, such as the with-holding of AIDS medication. My solution would be a combination of extremely short-term patents (a few years depending on the circumstances) and Common Decency Laws which make using your patents or copyrights in a manor that will harm a large number individuals (such as forcing an AIDS medicine to be withhoeld from needy people) illegal and grounds for the cancellation of your patents/copyrights. Rather than using your legal clout and "technical genius" (like Macromedia, lol) to stop piracy, a company should simply make copyright compliance easier than piracy (this could be done with lowering of excessive prices, adding of "hard" (poster, stickers or similar items...sickos I know what you were thinking) items to your purchases, warranties, etc. For example if I want to back-up my CDs right now I need to either burn them or buy a new full price album. If a better solution was offered, such as CD copying for 4-5 dollars, I might decide to not buy a burner because it's cheaper and better quality to pay for their services. In the eend it's all about forcing companies to "play fair" while still making it worthwhile for them to develop products. Will this ever happen? I don't think so, corporations wield to much power now for them to ever give it up. Just my opinion.
to get away from Microsoft. I really hate Microsoft, IMHO their products are over-rated and extremely buggy and their business practices make me sick. Microsoft basically destroyed Netscape (which at one time a much better browser) using their monopoly powers and I have a feeling if they become the only browser supplier they are going to tie their browser to their ISP (they've already started to) making MSN the only option for stable web-browsing. Then simply make MSN even more incompatible with Linux (does anyone know how to configure ppp on linux (in console) to support the knew MSN Explorer style MSN ?) and make it exremely hard to get online with Linux. That is why I am glad there are competing browsers, as long as they have to compete with the others MS can't do anything that may anger their browser users yet.
Finally, a news article that was not innacurate or written specifically to cause panic. I don't know how many average people will read this article but I hope quite a few do. The more of these truthful (a nasty word in most of the press) articles the better, in fact I would encourage all of you to write to this man thnaking him for the article and to link to the page if you have a website. Maybe if he gets enough positive mail, and the page gets enough hits, Time will let him write more major articles. A little truth in the press can't hurt Linux or the Open Source movement.
Open Source needs several things if it is going to become a MAJOR influence on the programming world.
First, the "unsexy" work needs to get done. The problem is, people who are not getting payed can not be forced to do the "boring" work. An easy solution for this problem would be finding a way to give people who work on certain listed projects credit for their work. Maybe a website with a list of boring but neccessary projects, anyone who submits code for those projects will have their name listed next to their contribution, a donations page would also be a good idea.
Open Source also needs one BIG cross-platform application that EVERYONE will have to use, something absolutely huge. This will draw attention to the Open Source movement, a lot of attention.
Finally, Open Source needs to take a page from the "Book of Proven Corporate Tactics" and start spewing (like the exorcist chick) large amounts of propaganda. If Joe sixpack can be scared into looking into Open Source projects by horror stories of proprietary software then thats what we need. A news webpage of some type that is linked to by several major sites and a bunch of volunteer "scare" reporters should suffice.
Oh yeah, one last thing. Open Source NEEDS CODE. (note period)
wow, I must be the only /.er who ever posted a comment that was funny, redundant, and a troll all at the same time :)
I'm sorry to say this but unfortunately very few home-users are going to buy a system with Linux pre-installed. Many linux users build their own system, others prefer to buy a windows system and simply place Linux on a partition so that they can boot to windows if they want to play a game thats not available on Linux, finally many Linux users have to share their computer with others who want Windows installed. I would estimate that 70-80 percent of all home Linux users fall in to those categories, maybe more. I don't particularly like Dell (or any major OEM) but it's obvious to me why they had to stop shipping out home Linux systems.
You can still install Linux on a Dell System, you just can't buy one with Linux already installed anymore.
OK, I've explained te difference several times already, but what the hell I'll say it again. the difference is that the linux kernal and the distrobution are not connected in the business sense. With Linux you can get the plain kernal if you want it, or you can choose to use distrobution with software pre-installed, with Windows you can not. Windows is made by M$, Internet Explorer is made by Microsoft, Microsoft is using it's monopoly powers to force people to have Internet Explorer (which for most people means they use IE). If IE was made by company X and company X payed M$ to put IE in windows, then that would not be illegal because Netscape could also pay M$ to include Navigator. As for KDE, KDE is a GUI not an OS. You do not need KDE to run Linux, if you want another GUI you can install it, try running Windows without the GUI (impossible) or replacing the GUI with another (impossible). The problem with MSs tactics is that it is integrating its own sofware with its own OS, thus giving their product an unfair advantage over competitiors. Since the Linux Kernal is completely different from the Linux Distro and any GUIs that might be used, it is a completely different subject. Now if KDE came built directly into the Kernal and you could not uninstall it and use Gnome, that would be illegal.
Bills check must have bounced.
hmmm, or maybe thats why they first released it in countries where the consumer is not protected by the law as well as they are in the US. By the way, if I have 4 Elvis CDs and I take 3 songs from each CD and burn them onto one CD for my personal use, that is not illegal and yes it is an "Elvis compilation". Acutally fair use does not even sau they have to make it easy for you to copy, only that they can't sue you for copying....but if I make a copy then I'm not doing anything ilegal....if they put noise in their CD that will destroy my equipment and do not properly label it...that is illegal. Also, their technology relies on CD players auto-correcting errors to get rid of the noise.....maybe an older or cheap CD player wouldn't correct the errors as well, wouldn't you agree thats a possibility? As for having lawyers....if lawyers never made mistakes I guess that all the lawsuits against companies going on right now are BS, after all ow could any company with lawyers ever do something illegal when their lawyers would obviously tell them not to....your logic is as flawed as your personality. Learn to read and express your opinions in an intelligent manner, then you can start posting to /. again.
Ever hear of fair use laws? Copying CDs you bought for personal use IS NOT ILLEGAL, and the fact is on older cd players and maybe even on newer ones the original CD COULD DAMAGE THE EQUIPMENT. I usually don't flame flamers but people who conveniantly ignore the facts of a story deserve it, either you knew about fair use and ignored it, or you don't read any of the other 10,000 posts that mention it. Copying a CD and selling/giving it to another is illegal, not just copying it.
Thats right, I am now using "The Executioner" to stop people who may steal my car. The system is very simple, when I press the Skull Button on my keychain a large amount of electricity is allowed to run rampant over the surface of my car. Anyone who comes into contact with the surface of my car is instantly fried. Yes accidental contact may occur as well as legal contact (a police officer issuing a ticket) but as long as there are thieves who would take my car, I feel I am within my rights to protect my property. In order to demostarte this product effectively I have randomly placed 100,000 cars of different makes and models all over the US, in order to maximize the effect several are parked illegally in various ways.
.wav file, then burning it? I know it would supposedly decrease the quality, but from what I'm hearing it sounds like they are already doing that themselves. These companies need to realize that THEY WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO STOP US FROM COPYING AUDIO MEDIA. Give up and start putting special items, such as posters and stickers, into the CD cases of your Albums to encourage people to buy them.....you can't burn a poster.
If you in any way questioned the legality or ethical implications of the product mentioned above then you can not support this copy-protection or you are a hypocrite.
On a side note, whats to stop me from playing a CD into the microphone of my computer and recording each track as a
Actually, I purposefully used inproper grammar in that statement for a comedic effect. I am actually very good at English, even though I do not do the homework, so good, in fact, that I recently scored a 730 out of a possible 800 on the Verbal section of the SAT. In short, do not judge a persons intelligence by their posts on a web forum, they may simply prefer using common vernacular.
I'm a high-school (and a lazy dont do no homework one at that) student so I of course have some of the best stories, but I'll only share the ones that won't get me drawn and quartered if one of my teachers/enemy students happens to read this. I found out I had a health project due ten minutes before it was due (I don't listen in stupid classes), it was a collage on healthy food. On the way in the door I grabbed three projects out of the trash right outside the classroom, ripped off a few pictures from two of the posterboards they were on, licked them and slapped them on top of a few pictures on the third poster-board :) I got an A+.
As long as you don't sell it before it's actually completed and don't use your "fake" demo to belittle other companies that make similar products that don't have your "fake" feature until the "fake" feature becomes a real one. And if it's a competitors product with duct-tape over the label then no it's not OK unles you state that it's a competitors product with duct tape over the label.
Glad to see that the billions(?) of dollars Macrovision put into researching their new copyright protection technique (purposefully damaging the CD so it emits noise....absolute genius) payed off. I mean they delayed burning for a whole 2 weeks, that probably saved them -1,999,999,999 dollars. You cannot stop the copying of audio or video media.....hmmm lets see, set my PC to record a .wav file and link the headphone jack of my CD player to the microphone jack, or just play the CD really loud and use a computer microphone to record it.....yeah it sacrifices quality but so does purposefully inserting loud static hisses on to the CD. Give it up and concentrate on making your products better so they will actually be worth the money you charge, use your copy-protection money to put posters and special things inside albums to encourage buying the original, that might actually work.
you'll feel differently when a radio station decides to charge a subscription fee and it becomes illegal for you to have a radio that can receive station xxx.xx . How is this situation different from the direct TV situation? both services broadcast information through the air, one just has pictures. What should happen is Direct TV should charge stations that want to be included on Direct TV, the stations should charge companies for advertising, and the end-user should get the service for free (of course he'll have to watch advertisements. How about if I decide the Direct TV signal is annoying and I don't want it in my home, shouldn't they have to find a way to get it out of there. Your last statements are flawed because I don't purposefully reflect light, it just happens, and as for sound....if I'm too loud I beleive you can call the police for disturbing the peace.
ha our triple-super-duper-protection device will foil you!!!
Oh yeah, the Z34Vfds3 shreds your protection HAR HAR HAR!!!
ahh-haa!! quadruple-super-dee-duper protection device 4943jffj$, try to stop this!!!!!
Oh jeez, it took 25 minutes for my pet chimpanzee to figure out a work-arround with his model: sld2383D slide ruler....but my parrot had to help him, so I guess you made progress
hmmmm, let's get them arrested. HAHAHA.
Jeez, you got two of us, out of 3 million....good job.
now repeat from the beginning accept change the letter/numbers of the devices arround and add a few dee-dupers.....Piracy will continue no matter what, accept it and concentrate on making your products better, nothing has worked yet and nothing ever will.
completely ignoring the Sklyarov situation. Actually, it doesn't suprise me at all, but thats because I have discovered the secret media equations..... Virus = bad hacker = ratings , Dmitry = innocent = bad U.S = not blindly patriotic = bad ratings/disbelief , I'd give the rest of the equations including how to calculate the honesty and accuracy of all news stories....but I want to keep them a secret HAHAHAHA.....
To: you@you.com
From: MadMan2002@techie.com
I am sending this to you in order to have your advice.
Attachment: SecretMediaFormulas.doc.pif
damn, doesn't that just figure
I'll bet the farm when the Radeon 2 comes out it will be cheaper than the GeForce 3 was when it came out. Also the 1st generation Radeon isn't that far below the GeForce 3, most gamer sites I've seen reccomen getting the Radeon over the GeForce three or waiting for the price to go down, which of course is moot since I am getting a GeForce 3, I just think saying ATI card are overpriced crap is a little extreme and a lt inaccurate.
I was talking about straight from a major store chain, where Joe Sixpack generally gets his card. At pricewatch I could get an ATI Radeon 64MB DDR for under $150. But then I'd probably spend hundreds of dollars on cooling equipment so I could seriously overclock it without frying the damn thing. Anyway since I just realized my lawsuit money all goes into a trust which will take a while to break, I'll probably end up getting a GeForce 10 by the time I get my money :)