Its the second triad of magnetism. Instead of Iron+, it uses Rhodium+.
Now we can get around to developing humanoid robots to serve and protect humanity...
its more like the Airlines getting together and asking for more business friendly laws of physics.
"please mr newton, it would be sooo much easier if we didn't have to deal with these silly wings and engines"
Ask and ye shall receive. A nice fellow named Albert gave them a new physics that allowed for time dialation and distance shrinking if they flew fast enough, and under a suitable gravity they also get warped space for free. Great!
(Of cource it was an inside job; he was someones relativity).
The quote at the bottom of the slashdot page said it well: Die, v.: To stop sinning suddenly. -- Elbert Hubbard
Businesses need profit to continue. They thought they could get some from the Internet, but it is not being as cooperative as they thought. This is bad, because all the money being pored into buiding the internet (all those millions going into the fiber, routers, name servers, bandwidth) isn't just free beer. Someone payed for it, and that someone wants something back for it. They are not paying for a playgound, they are paying for a market.
If all businesses suddenly decide that they gave up on the internet and went somewhere else, the fiber would go dark, the routers would shut down and nameservers would stop.
That's not likely to happen; Too much investment. More likely, some variation of Cringely's comments (but not likely MS) will happen, with more control on users, logins, tracing, routine and whatever. It will either be tamed or it will evaporate. It will not survive without good investment, and good investment will only come from somebodies profits.
If businesses think the internet is just a bunch of pirates and thieves, they will either remove the pirates or remove the internet. So they remove the pirates (DMCA. et al). Further control to come.
Say good buy to the wild west, and keep all the good stories around for your kids.
their case is different from Dmitry's in that (please correct me if i'm mistaken) they're giving the software away for free, not selling it to make money, so they're not breaking any laws, even under the DMCA.
The DMCA doesn't care how you get the software out, sell or otherwise, it's illegal.
That asside, It's hard to see how intentionally corrupting otherwise readable data can be construed as protection on the level that DVD's use. Writing something that bypasses an error condition is a lot different than decrypting or otherwise breaking strong (or weak: see Adobe) protections. It can honestly be said to be of benefit to systems in general. All software needs good error management and recovery. Adding a little more shouldn't (!) be considered illegal, no matter who wants it to be.
Of course, these are business lawyers. They don't know about good quality products (software or music) they only know profit.
Wouldn't you rather have viewers, even if they don't know who you are, than not have them.
Not quite. Stations get ratings from statistics gathered through various forms, including polls. If the poller asks someone what station they watched, and the person doesn't know, then the station gets no recognition. The poll results set the value of the stations advertising time, not the actual number of viewers.
When statistics gatherers can tell what station you were watching without having to ask (i.e. smart boxes that report back channel and time usage), then you would be correct. This form has other problems, such as I left the box on and walked out of the house. Statistics get recorded, but I wasn't actually watching.
Station recognition has other benefits that I won't go into. It's not just about what the viewer cares about.
This is not that big a deal. It calls in the recent Freelance writers victory over publishers, giving them the right to negotiate separately publication formats.
All it means to the RIAA is:
1. They must negotiate the right to publish online separately. They'll just add another clause to the existing contracts and continue as usual.
2. Older content that was not licensed under the newer contracts must be renegotiated for electronic format with the artist. That just means that older content is not likely to make it into newer distribution channels if the artist doesn't agree or can't be found.
So less music makes it into the channel. And we all lose more of our history and old favorites becuase RIAA chooses not to redistribute or can't.
Putting further restrictions on content flow is not a good thing, even if it is limiting the RIAA.
But the idea must be the elimination of a centralized control,
All true,
Where I was trying to go was to define business trust, not security trust (although that is necessary also). Businesses need to know:
1. Is my money safe and on its way to where it belongs? (profit)
2. Am I really dealing with who I think I am dealing with? (liability)
3. When something goes wrong, who do I call that can REALLY fix it? (performance/reliability)
4. Will all of my investment in this technology still be usefull in x years? (investment)
The first and second can be physically possible with open solutions, though businesses tent to understand names and contracts better than they understand software and protocols. Lawyers want to here it form other lawyers. They need a name, a presence to deal with.
The Third is probably the kicker. In an open decentralized system, who does have enough authority to fix any problem? That comes with a response requirement, not just a "post it on some mailing list and it will most likely get fixed by someone". This means fixing data problems, not program bugs. Any authority that can honestly guarentee fixes is likely to also fall enough into the category of controller that they eventually accumulate weasles and become another ICANN. Without that much authority, businesses won't trust the process.
A decentralized system would not be able to offer guarenteed performance. As an example, SMPT and E-Mail. (a bad example of security, but an example of decentralized process.) When things go wrong in E-mail (such as spam) there isn't really any single point of contact to fix it. you have to chase it down and negotiate with each provider; No fun for anyone.
The last point is more likely to be plus for open source than for Pasport or Hailstorm. MS has too many leashes and is willing to pull them.
Most people appear not to like Hailstorm becuase it gives Microsoft control over an import intermediary service. I'd aggree with that.
However, there have been suggestions that it be replaced be an open source version (such as dotGNU). I'm not sure what how that would work.
Hailstore is a service. We could certainly write server and service software that does the same job, but that isn't what makes Hailstore what it is. You need to have a recognized central server that everyone agrees on and recognizes, even more than one. It has to be trusted. It has to be scalable. Those things don't happen just because you hack together code. That requires business and laywer since.
Someone somewhere will put together an organization to run these services, they will comply with security, safety and privacy laws so they will have their stable of lawyers. Eventually one of these services may even become respectable and trustworhty enough to overtake Passport and Hailstorm.
BUT! Whenever you have this much control and authority over a widely used resource, there eventually comes power, corruption and collusion. EVEN IF IT STARTED OUT AS A GOOD OPEN PROJECT, THE WEASLES WILL SMELL MONEY AND FIND THEIR WAY IN. Just look at the ICANN.
Replacing Hailstorm will take more than software and protocols, It will take an Honest Open Project Management. That's hard to find, and it can't be hacked together.
... and if their car breaks down on the side of the road because they didn't maintain strict maintenance checks, it should be confiscated without reimbursement. And if their pet poops on the neighbors yard, it should be killed. And if you didn't fully understand the text of all those laws you accidently broke, you should be thrown in prison for life.
You are correct that it is the Law rather than Adobe.
Large corporations bought their favorite laws through lawmakers and going through them is the way to remove the law.
However, by making an example of Adobe, you discorage other companies from trying similar tactics. Notice how Adobe is backing off so far and so quickly? This indicates that they and others will think long and hard about trying something similar in the future.
The DMCA is their way of restricting our otherwise legal rights to fair use by using technology. A Boycott is our way of restricting their otherwise legal right to prosecute by using PR.
So it includes storing programs on network servers. It probably also includes home networks. Does it include Javascript in web pages? Talk about reaching to the core.
At this pace, access to any usefull information will be restricted and at a price. Only the rich and "appropriate" people will be able to get access to the variety of information we take for granted today. Can't pay? Can't learn!
There must be some way to tie this into all those "Education initiatives" all of the politicians are talking about but not doing anything about. Make library and content access an education issue. Give them a PR black eye. (As if they aren't already doing that to themselves.)
I had a friend tell me about a time he had driven through Mass., RI border to NH border up I95, in about an hour, going around 100 most of the way, sometimes in the breakdown lane.
Oh, and the state trooper was in the passengers seat egging him on.
I guess it depends on how well you know the trooper.
Please excuse my lack of detail. I was refering to OC-192 (9.6 Gb transmission, 4 way frequency multiplexing) Those run around a million a rack.
And I am less sure of the transmission distance. I know some older equipment (OC3 and OC12) were more limited in range, probably 50 miles. I couldn't remember what the range of the later OC48 and OC192 equipment was, though it is probably farther than that.
You could probably fill the countryside with 100-MB fiber, but that wouldn't exactly help the data load much.
I worked in MCI network construction a few years ago.
They layed tons of fiber all over the place. When you have to lay fiber, its easier to lay in 12 or 24 at a time even when you only need 4. If you have to run some, might as well run more than you need. It's cheaper to put more in once than put more in again later.
It's the transmission equipment that costs. The repeaters/terminals that have to go in all along the way (~50 miles apart I think, maybe more) that cost a million each unit. That is hard to come by.
Sure, go light up all that dark fiber. All it'll cost you is a few hundred million, then you have another 10 GB cross country fiber.
Long ago when I was learning programming, Pascal was my introduction to "structured programming", the fortran guys were still banging the "real programmers" drum, and C was some new fangeled thing that was being used in a few labs. They actually had a "programming for beginners" class (for english/history/arts types) in APL! So there are stranger ways to learn about programming.
A few years ago I was asked to teach a Java class. As I got into it, the thing that struck me as being the most annoying was the requirement for error handeling. When I was trying to explain regular syntax, flow and procedure calls, I had to keep including exception syntax just to make it compile. For a while you can just wave it off and say "just include this for now, we'll go over it later". But that means you can't give really open design assignments. It has to be very limited so they can use the few exception examples and still have it compile.
Suppose I bring up a slashdot page and read a bunch of user comments. One of them contains a link to some other site. I read the link and then comment back to the original comment refering to the link.
Now that poster says "What are you talking about? I never said that!". Big argument starts.
How much do you think this is going to happen on a site like this?
This is what happens when meta tags get stuck into pages without notice or control.
You obviously have strong opinions about religion in education. This is fine. But you are carrying too much of that bagage into this conversation.
The original commenter stated that he felt that he was being suppressed because of his beliefs and that he was uncomfortable with that situation.
Then you come in with your long diatribe about the history of christianity in general.
This kid is not responsable for all of that any more than you are responsable for IBM's participation in WWII Germany just because you like playing with computers.
The original post was a kid who felt suppressed because of his beliefs. you suppress him some more.
Lots of geeks are suppressed in school, because other people do not understand why they enjoy doing the things they do. Supressing this poor kid is about as bad as picking on the geek kids.
He's just a kid. Don't lay the whole history on him.
(If you feel like accusing me of some incredible bias, note this: You don't know squat about MY opinion. So don't make assumptions)
Mindspring and Earthlink need access to Bell equipment to allow high speed access (Generally through a wide area carrier such as Covad). If the Bells restrictions are removed and they are allowed to do what they want, the first thing they will do is disallow competing companies access to their equipment, or bump up the price to something ridiculuous. Then it doesn't matter what the customer wants, Earthlink simply won't have access to give it to them.
Slashdot Mirror
Its the second triad of magnetism. Instead of Iron+, it uses Rhodium+.
Now we can get around to developing humanoid robots to serve and protect humanity...
"please mr newton, it would be sooo much easier if we didn't have to deal with these silly wings and engines"
Ask and ye shall receive. A nice fellow named Albert gave them a new physics that allowed for time dialation and distance shrinking if they flew fast enough, and under a suitable gravity they also get warped space for free. Great!
(Of cource it was an inside job; he was someones relativity).
Businesses need profit to continue. They thought they could get some from the Internet, but it is not being as cooperative as they thought. This is bad, because all the money being pored into buiding the internet (all those millions going into the fiber, routers, name servers, bandwidth) isn't just free beer. Someone payed for it, and that someone wants something back for it. They are not paying for a playgound, they are paying for a market.
If all businesses suddenly decide that they gave up on the internet and went somewhere else, the fiber would go dark, the routers would shut down and nameservers would stop.
That's not likely to happen; Too much investment. More likely, some variation of Cringely's comments (but not likely MS) will happen, with more control on users, logins, tracing, routine and whatever. It will either be tamed or it will evaporate. It will not survive without good investment, and good investment will only come from somebodies profits.
If businesses think the internet is just a bunch of pirates and thieves, they will either remove the pirates or remove the internet. So they remove the pirates (DMCA. et al). Further control to come.
Say good buy to the wild west, and keep all the good stories around for your kids.
The DMCA doesn't care how you get the software out, sell or otherwise, it's illegal.
That asside, It's hard to see how intentionally corrupting otherwise readable data can be construed as protection on the level that DVD's use. Writing something that bypasses an error condition is a lot different than decrypting or otherwise breaking strong (or weak: see Adobe) protections. It can honestly be said to be of benefit to systems in general. All software needs good error management and recovery. Adding a little more shouldn't (!) be considered illegal, no matter who wants it to be.
Of course, these are business lawyers. They don't know about good quality products (software or music) they only know profit.
Not quite. Stations get ratings from statistics gathered through various forms, including polls. If the poller asks someone what station they watched, and the person doesn't know, then the station gets no recognition. The poll results set the value of the stations advertising time, not the actual number of viewers.
When statistics gatherers can tell what station you were watching without having to ask (i.e. smart boxes that report back channel and time usage), then you would be correct.
This form has other problems, such as I left the box on and walked out of the house. Statistics get recorded, but I wasn't actually watching.
Station recognition has other benefits that I won't go into. It's not just about what the viewer cares about.
(See Nik)
All it means to the RIAA is:
1. They must negotiate the right to publish online separately. They'll just add another clause to the existing contracts and continue as usual.
2. Older content that was not licensed under the newer contracts must be renegotiated for electronic format with the artist. That just means that older content is not likely to make it into newer distribution channels if the artist doesn't agree or can't be found.
So less music makes it into the channel. And we all lose more of our history and old favorites becuase RIAA chooses not to redistribute or can't.
Putting further restrictions on content flow is not a good thing, even if it is limiting the RIAA.
All true,
Where I was trying to go was to define business trust, not security trust (although that is necessary also). Businesses need to know:
1. Is my money safe and on its way to where it belongs? (profit)
2. Am I really dealing with who I think I am dealing with? (liability)
3. When something goes wrong, who do I call that can REALLY fix it? (performance/reliability)
4. Will all of my investment in this technology still be usefull in x years? (investment)
The first and second can be physically possible with open solutions, though businesses tent to understand names and contracts better than they understand software and protocols. Lawyers want to here it form other lawyers. They need a name, a presence to deal with.
The Third is probably the kicker. In an open decentralized system, who does have enough authority to fix any problem? That comes with a response requirement, not just a "post it on some mailing list and it will most likely get fixed by someone". This means fixing data problems, not program bugs. Any authority that can honestly guarentee fixes is likely to also fall enough into the category of controller that they eventually accumulate weasles and become another ICANN. Without that much authority, businesses won't trust the process.
A decentralized system would not be able to offer guarenteed performance. As an example, SMPT and E-Mail. (a bad example of security, but an example of decentralized process.) When things go wrong in E-mail (such as spam) there isn't really any single point of contact to fix it. you have to chase it down and negotiate with each provider; No fun for anyone.
The last point is more likely to be plus for open source than for Pasport or Hailstorm. MS has too many leashes and is willing to pull them.
However, there have been suggestions that it be replaced be an open source version (such as dotGNU). I'm not sure what how that would work.
Hailstore is a service. We could certainly write server and service software that does the same job, but that isn't what makes Hailstore what it is. You need to have a recognized central server that everyone agrees on and recognizes, even more than one. It has to be trusted. It has to be scalable. Those things don't happen just because you hack together code. That requires business and laywer since.
Someone somewhere will put together an organization to run these services, they will comply with security, safety and privacy laws so they will have their stable of lawyers. Eventually one of these services may even become respectable and trustworhty enough to overtake Passport and Hailstorm.
BUT! Whenever you have this much control and authority over a widely used resource, there eventually comes power, corruption and collusion. EVEN IF IT STARTED OUT AS A GOOD OPEN PROJECT, THE WEASLES WILL SMELL MONEY AND FIND THEIR WAY IN. Just look at the ICANN.
Replacing Hailstorm will take more than software and protocols, It will take an Honest Open Project Management. That's hard to find, and it can't be hacked together.
... and if their car breaks down on the side of the road because they didn't maintain strict maintenance checks, it should be confiscated without reimbursement. And if their pet poops on the neighbors yard, it should be killed. And if you didn't fully understand the text of all those laws you accidently broke, you should be thrown in prison for life.
Large corporations bought their favorite laws through lawmakers and going through them is the way to remove the law.
However, by making an example of Adobe, you discorage other companies from trying similar tactics. Notice how Adobe is backing off so far and so quickly? This indicates that they and others will think long and hard about trying something similar in the future.
The DMCA is their way of restricting our otherwise legal rights to fair use by using technology. A Boycott is our way of restricting their otherwise legal right to prosecute by using PR.
Another format to crack!
All the good themes have been taken and turned into Theme-parks. - HHH, Pump up the Volume
So it includes storing programs on network servers. It probably also includes home networks. Does it include Javascript in web pages? Talk about reaching to the core.
Now all we have to do is indoctrinate respect for consumers rights into all business licenses and we're done.
There must be some way to tie this into all those "Education initiatives" all of the politicians are talking about but not doing anything about. Make library and content access an education issue. Give them a PR black eye. (As if they aren't already doing that to themselves.)
Oh, and the state trooper was in the passengers seat egging him on.
I guess it depends on how well you know the trooper.
And I am less sure of the transmission distance. I know some older equipment (OC3 and OC12) were more limited in range, probably 50 miles. I couldn't remember what the range of the later OC48 and OC192 equipment was, though it is probably farther than that.
You could probably fill the countryside with 100-MB fiber, but that wouldn't exactly help the data load much.
They layed tons of fiber all over the place. When you have to lay fiber, its easier to lay in 12 or 24 at a time even when you only need 4. If you have to run some, might as well run more than you need. It's cheaper to put more in once than put more in again later.
It's the transmission equipment that costs. The repeaters/terminals that have to go in all along the way (~50 miles apart I think, maybe more) that cost a million each unit. That is hard to come by.
Sure, go light up all that dark fiber. All it'll cost you is a few hundred million, then you have another 10 GB cross country fiber.
A few years ago I was asked to teach a Java class. As I got into it, the thing that struck me as being the most annoying was the requirement for error handeling. When I was trying to explain regular syntax, flow and procedure calls, I had to keep including exception syntax just to make it compile. For a while you can just wave it off and say "just include this for now, we'll go over it later". But that means you can't give really open design assignments. It has to be very limited so they can use the few exception examples and still have it compile.
That does not mean that you can copy anything you want. It means that it will not display any copy protected content.
Now that poster says "What are you talking about? I never said that!". Big argument starts.
How much do you think this is going to happen on a site like this?
This is what happens when meta tags get stuck into pages without notice or control.
The solution is source distribution.
Compilers know more about the program than translators do, and they also allow linking to native libraries. Can a translator do that?
Yet another proprietary solution to fix another problem caused by proprietary solutions.
The original commenter stated that he felt that he was being suppressed because of his beliefs and that he was uncomfortable with that situation.
Then you come in with your long diatribe about the history of christianity in general.
This kid is not responsable for all of that any more than you are responsable for IBM's participation in WWII Germany just because you like playing with computers.
The original post was a kid who felt suppressed because of his beliefs. you suppress him some more.
Lots of geeks are suppressed in school, because other people do not understand why they enjoy doing the things they do. Supressing this poor kid is about as bad as picking on the geek kids.
He's just a kid. Don't lay the whole history on him.
(If you feel like accusing me of some incredible bias, note this: You don't know squat about MY opinion. So don't make assumptions)
Mindspring and Earthlink need access to Bell equipment to allow high speed access (Generally through a wide area carrier such as Covad). If the Bells restrictions are removed and they are allowed to do what they want, the first thing they will do is disallow competing companies access to their equipment, or bump up the price to something ridiculuous. Then it doesn't matter what the customer wants, Earthlink simply won't have access to give it to them.