While I've pretty much stopped buying cds from music row years ago, and now only purchase cd's from local artists (God, I love Austin), who actually see the profits from the cds, I still don't see how its security methods, are gonna prevent me from hooking it (if it actually catches on) to my receiver w/ digital output, and hooking that up to my sound card w/ digital input... How is this keeping me from copying the audio?
Average American citizens believe that because they've done nothing wrong that this invasion of privacy does not affect them. That's what eastern europeans thought before WWII. Think about this: So, you have some unfounded trust in your current government. You think that the invasion of privacy will only lead to greater safety.
This just reminds me of a really good quote by Benjamin Franklin that I'd really like to share...
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin
According to the Child Protection Act of 1984 (18 U.S.C. 2251-2255) child pornography is described as a sexually explicit photograph of anyone 17 years of age or younger. This means that a picture taken by mom or pop of their little child would not constitute as child pornography.
For more information you can go here.
Its for this reason that M$ has "buddied" with some universities (like UT Austin), where they sell full blown professional copies (not educational or home versions) of their software at $5 a cd...
I was not referring to innovation. I personally believe that AMD's TBird was by far superior to Intel's P3. As for the marketing, yes I am aware that there are some OEMs that do use AMD cpus, however look at the big picture. Of the top OEMs including Dell, Compaq, HP, IBM, and Gateway, only Compaq (I believe) ships home desktops with AMD processors.
I had a professor last semester that worked at Intel, and several things he told me, reminded me of somthing: It's still a busisness. In my opinion Intel will not make any huge move, until they KNOW that they will profit off of it. This means that they won't make any major move until the consumer market is there. For example, he was telling us that there have been times where they have come up with ideas that would in fact increase performance, HOWEVER due to their wonderful job at brainwashing the entire public into thinking that clockspeed is THE measure of performance, they scrapped the ideas because they noticed that they would cost too much to implement, and would result in no frequency increase. (Thanks Intel)
I also think that while AMD has shown that they can provide an honest competition in terms of performance, it is going to be stuck following Intel's every move, for the mere reason that Intel is "sleeping with" so many big OEMS (*cough* Dell *cough*), leaving it as the CPU for the hobbyist
int main() {
if (ie.detected() == false)
exit(1);
else {
bootLogo.show();
double x,y;
for(x = 0; x 2000000000; x++)//Pause to show logo
for(y = 0; y 2000000000; y++);
windows.begin()
}
When they took the 4th Amendment away
I was quiet because I didn't deal in drugs...
When they took the 6th Amendment away
I was quiet because I had never been arrested...
When they took the 2nd Amendment away
I was quiet because I didn't own a gun...
Now they have taken the 1st Amendment away
and all I can do is be quiet...
Re:As a Trillian and AIM user...
on
AOL vs. Trillian
·
· Score: 1
AIM is utter crap! The ONLY reason I started using it was because all of my high school friends were sending me screennames for it when they went off to college... It came down to start using it, or to not keep in touch w/ them because almost none of them would have had a clue if i suggested for them to use ICQ or IRC...
On a sidenote... What are you talking about when you said ICQ is not "AOL-ized" too much... I stopped using it shortly after AOL bought it out because it started to turning into crap. Before AOL it was (if I remember right) ad-free... Now it is even more ad-ridden then AIM, w/ ads taking up a fifth of each message window as well.
Music CDs include a serial number that identifies them. How do you think CD player software can dial up CDDB and get the track info?
Actually, there is no ID actually stored on the CD. The client that interfaces w/ CDDB uses track time information to create a "unique" ID for a CD, which is then used to search CDDB. This is why you will sometimes find CDs where CDDB returns more than one possible title.
2) Microsoft's security model has had only a few years of evolution, the UNIX/Linux/BSD model has had almost twenty years of networked connected time to get it right.
Rather ironic since at one time MS had posted an article on their website in attempt to clarify any "myths" about linux (At the time was a very amusing read). It since has been removed (hrmm... wonder why...) however a cached copy can be found at http://www.biznix.org/whylinux/microsoft1.htm. Anyways the reason why I bring this whole article up, is that one of the reasons that MS stated about why they think NT is better is because "Linux fundamentally relies on 30-year-old operating system technology and architecture"
Slashdot Mirror
While I've pretty much stopped buying cds from music row years ago, and now only purchase cd's from local artists (God, I love Austin), who actually see the profits from the cds, I still don't see how its security methods, are gonna prevent me from hooking it (if it actually catches on) to my receiver w/ digital output, and hooking that up to my sound card w/ digital input... How is this keeping me from copying the audio?
Average American citizens believe that because they've done nothing wrong that this invasion of privacy does not affect them. That's what eastern europeans thought before WWII. Think about this: So, you have some unfounded trust in your current government. You think that the invasion of privacy will only lead to greater safety.
This just reminds me of a really good quote by Benjamin Franklin that I'd really like to share...
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin
Would you prefer .jointphotographicexpertsgroup2000??
Bribery is very hard to prove, that's why.
According to the Child Protection Act of 1984 (18 U.S.C. 2251-2255) child pornography is described as a sexually explicit photograph of anyone 17 years of age or younger. This means that a picture taken by mom or pop of their little child would not constitute as child pornography. For more information you can go here.
Its for this reason that M$ has "buddied" with some universities (like UT Austin), where they sell full blown professional copies (not educational or home versions) of their software at $5 a cd...
Do a search like flowers or cars, you'll see em at the top and right side of the screen
I was not referring to innovation. I personally believe that AMD's TBird was by far superior to Intel's P3. As for the marketing, yes I am aware that there are some OEMs that do use AMD cpus, however look at the big picture. Of the top OEMs including Dell, Compaq, HP, IBM, and Gateway, only Compaq (I believe) ships home desktops with AMD processors.
I had a professor last semester that worked at Intel, and several things he told me, reminded me of somthing: It's still a busisness. In my opinion Intel will not make any huge move, until they KNOW that they will profit off of it. This means that they won't make any major move until the consumer market is there. For example, he was telling us that there have been times where they have come up with ideas that would in fact increase performance, HOWEVER due to their wonderful job at brainwashing the entire public into thinking that clockspeed is THE measure of performance, they scrapped the ideas because they noticed that they would cost too much to implement, and would result in no frequency increase. (Thanks Intel)
I also think that while AMD has shown that they can provide an honest competition in terms of performance, it is going to be stuck following Intel's every move, for the mere reason that Intel is "sleeping with" so many big OEMS (*cough* Dell *cough*), leaving it as the CPU for the hobbyist
Well, anyways, that's just my 2c...
"Mommy, Tommy threw my shoe out the window."
"If you two don't stop it right now, I'm just going to have to turn this spaceship around right now! Do you want me to have to do that?!?"
int main() { //Pause to show logo
if (ie.detected() == false)
exit(1);
else {
bootLogo.show();
double x,y;
for(x = 0; x 2000000000; x++)
for(y = 0; y 2000000000; y++);
windows.begin()
}
When they took the 4th Amendment away
I was quiet because I didn't deal in drugs...
When they took the 6th Amendment away
I was quiet because I had never been arrested...
When they took the 2nd Amendment away
I was quiet because I didn't own a gun...
Now they have taken the 1st Amendment away
and all I can do is be quiet...
AIM is utter crap! The ONLY reason I started using it was because all of my high school friends were sending me screennames for it when they went off to college... It came down to start using it, or to not keep in touch w/ them because almost none of them would have had a clue if i suggested for them to use ICQ or IRC...
On a sidenote... What are you talking about when you said ICQ is not "AOL-ized" too much... I stopped using it shortly after AOL bought it out because it started to turning into crap. Before AOL it was (if I remember right) ad-free... Now it is even more ad-ridden then AIM, w/ ads taking up a fifth of each message window as well.
Music CDs include a serial number that identifies them. How do you think CD player software can dial up CDDB and get the track info?
Actually, there is no ID actually stored on the CD. The client that interfaces w/ CDDB uses track time information to create a "unique" ID for a CD, which is then used to search CDDB. This is why you will sometimes find CDs where CDDB returns more than one possible title.
2) Microsoft's security model has had only a few years of evolution, the UNIX/Linux/BSD model has had almost twenty years of networked connected time to get it right.
Rather ironic since at one time MS had posted an article on their website in attempt to clarify any "myths" about linux (At the time was a very amusing read). It since has been removed (hrmm... wonder why...) however a cached copy can be found at http://www.biznix.org/whylinux/microsoft1.htm. Anyways the reason why I bring this whole article up, is that one of the reasons that MS stated about why they think NT is better is because "Linux fundamentally relies on 30-year-old operating system technology and architecture"