Who do you think invented that term? if you call it digital rights management you are playing right into their pathetic marketing game. Call it digital restrictions management - a far more fitting description?
About bloody time, it seems pretty obvious to me that if you can't read a 'contract' before you have to pay for something that you cant return then your statutory rights are not being reserved..
I think I confused you by using the word unleaded.. you kind of missed the entire point of my example - maybe I should have said its like mandating that all cars meet certain emissions standards, but then banning all petrol/diesel/every other fuel. - Why have a V-Chip if its useless because you can't say anything V-Chip'able? If TVs have V-Chips then why can't people swear on TV and let the V-Chips handle it? - (if its because the V-Chips don't actually work like that then thats pretty stupid because im straight out of university and I could design a suitable standard in a week).
In that case.. why on earth is full censorship still used? Kinda like mandating that all cars use unleaded petrol (ie NOTHING else is allowed what-so-ever) when hydrogen and electric cars already exist, but these cars must also have a petrol engine for some absurd reason...
So because the majority want full censorship for themselves and they want to push it on everyone else when a technological solution clearly exists that would make everyone happy, that means the majority is clearly right does it? If everyone wants censorship then fine, but why not use the V-Chip or inverse-V-Chip?
Sounds like censorship? It is censorship. And not only is it unconstitutional, its also totally pointless because a technological solution exists that would make both sides happy. I think its probably the case that the pro-censorship side not only wants censorship for themselves, but also wants to force it on everyone else because "no-one should be allowed to watch that filth" - sounds like facism? yep it is.
I don't think this guy is the problem, the FCC is there like it or not to regulate things, which is fair enough as long as they don't do stupid things. Unfortunately the FCC is staffed by total incompetent jack-offs who sit around all day smoking crack and fundamentalist Christians who are so offended by someone so much as saying crap that they would ultimately like the death penalty for swearing. Now you could say its damn lucky that these people were carefully 'put' out of harms way from any real government jobs, or you could argue that the FCC is way way too much power for them. Id go for the latter and recommend mass lay-offs and get some people in who actually have a clue. It might seem that the complainer is just another fundie' pissed off about people swearing, but I think (i hope, otherwise he is just a total dick wad) he was just trying to push his business interests - his logic being that if his radio station gets fined for the audio equivalent of Jacksons' nipple (not even both!) then why should satellite radio get off scot free, because that would create an unfair business advantage and lock him out of many shows. However, he probably realised that asking the FCC to just stop all censorship would be similar to asking the Saudi Royal family to grow up and stop cutting peoples limbs off like cavemen, so he figured why not go for the more likely option - cutting everyone's balls off - it seems that didn't quite work, which while being a good thing, is totally beside the point.
What a load of bullshit, this reminds me of the senator who after seeing the video of a marine shooting an injured insurgent in a mosque was outraged and said that embedded news teams should be banned! This is totally ridiculous - OF COURSE the playing field should be levelled, otherwise what is the fucking point of the FCC? The field should however (and this to me is like explaining that the earth goes around the sun) be levelled on the totally opposite direction - get rid of the bloody censorship altogether! WTF are these people smoking?
Now could someone please explain why a V-Chip like system (that either blocks out the audio/video when it gets the signal OR unblocks a scrambled audio/video when it gets the signal) has not been standardised to solve this stupid problem? All the FCC needs to do is find out how many people oppose censorship vs how many are in favour and then decide which system to use and therefore who has to buy new radios/tvs or adaptors if they want to take advantage of it, it really is that simple. Or just do what the rest of the world does and not get so anal about hearing people swear.
I find most LCDs in public libraries/net-cafes are just not good enough for porn, you just need a CRT and theres no way around it, its abit sad to see so many people switching and knowing they will never be able to enjoy a good porno again. Luckely CRTs are cheap and crappier (read: cheaper) net cafes still have them. But having said that, I did have a go on one of those flashy new Apple LCDs and the cleavage looked pretty good, that was until the rude security guard kicked me out of the shop.
A California court has approved a $2.6 million settlement between Diebold and the State of California and Alameda County. The state and county had sued Diebold for fraudulent claims about the security of its electronic voting machines...And this fixes the bugs, how? Yes I read the rest of it. So now they will carry on using the same system (plus afew 'reports') and it will stay insecure. Kinda like the people who sue Tabaco companies and walk out of the court room already lighting up again.
'The disc will present itself as a CD-ROM to PCs, a Mac CD-ROM to Mac computers, a VCD to DVD players and CDDA disc to audio CD players. This multifunctional disc format offers full playability and therefore greater flexibility without lowering protection levels.' and 'By using a range of methodologies, including the construction of multiple protection layers, limiting the player accessibility to the provided player software, and encapsulating the red book audio content, XCP® successfully protects the content from unauthorised copying.'
And yes, the shift key will bypass all your hours and hours of pointless research, overblown 'technologies' and multiple orgasm dual-encrypted protection layers. I can safely assure you XCP® will NOT successfully protect Jack Shit from unauthorised bullshitting, and I can only wish First4Porn good luck in flogging this crap to the record labels before they realise they cant cancel the license... Actually I was wondering if I couldnt just make up a CD DRM system and give it lots of buzzwords about encryption and then sell it and skip the country? Any thoughts?
Because its way way cheaper: a multi-core CPU will be cheaper to mass produce for the same processing power as one CPU made in one factory and a totally different design of GPU on a separate card made in a separate factory. Also the interface will be much quicker because everything is on the same chip. The biggest reason to do it would be that your PC could divert its power depending on the application - if you were playing it a game then more cores would be used for graphics, where as if you were rendering for a movie, you could loose all the graphics resources and use those cores for something useful. PCs like to be general purpose, and the more purpose built hardware you have the more it costs and the more limited you are, the trend recently has been to do more in software and that would continue with multi-core CPUs.
Granted RAM speed would be an issue but im sure it would be fixed - graphics basically needs a certain speed of memory so it can get a certain frame rate and eventually that speed will be the same as system memory - maybe the cost saving will mean you can have super-fast RAM for all the system to use (and it won't be wasted when not using the graphics card) older on-motherboard graphics cards used to share with the system memory and it worked. Failing that, your new motherboard design could just let you stick your fast RAM next to the slow RAM and let the CPU cores choose which one they want to use? I think if Intel/AMD can get the cost of multi-core down low enough they would be able to put ATI etc out of business.
If we're talking multiple cores then it would basically be a copy of the same core lots of times on a wafer, if one or two didnt work the chip could just ignore them and be sold cheaper?
Touché, however, I observed your use of punctuation in jest and my retort was a witty counter-punch on two levels, the first portraying the ignorance of the common man in response to correction of Kings English and the second being the recursive use of sarcasm to the goal of punctuating your original point.
Supercomputers my ass, when will Intel admit that the real driving force behind faster hardware is lots of gibbing and blood splashing around the screen in real-time! This sounds like a very good idea and one that could maybe lead to a demise in separate graphics cards? your graphics could be handled on a separate core that gets its instructions from another core that maybe even separates collision detection and AI into other cores? I know purpose built hardware is always going to be faster at its job, but if this becomes much cheaper, it will just be more economical to ditch your graphics card and get more cores?
Don't bother asking the FCC for help - they're too worried about someone saying fuck or showing their tits. Seriously tho, what sort of idiot would actually sell these frequencies if they knew what they were used for?
I seriously think I should have gone into the finance industry instead of tech. After all its just another stupid system with rules you can learn and twist to your advantage, damnit I should have realised early on that the only job that matters is the one that makes the most money - hope its not too late to get some good profits..
Slashdot Mirror
DRM, digital rights management
Who do you think invented that term? if you call it digital rights management you are playing right into their pathetic marketing game. Call it digital restrictions management - a far more fitting description?
About bloody time, it seems pretty obvious to me that if you can't read a 'contract' before you have to pay for something that you cant return then your statutory rights are not being reserved..
I think I confused you by using the word unleaded.. you kind of missed the entire point of my example - maybe I should have said its like mandating that all cars meet certain emissions standards, but then banning all petrol/diesel/every other fuel. - Why have a V-Chip if its useless because you can't say anything V-Chip'able? If TVs have V-Chips then why can't people swear on TV and let the V-Chips handle it? - (if its because the V-Chips don't actually work like that then thats pretty stupid because im straight out of university and I could design a suitable standard in a week).
Well one of its incarnations is about wearing grey and shouting "Hail Hitler" which im guessing is the oposite of being nude and saying what you like?
In that case.. why on earth is full censorship still used? Kinda like mandating that all cars use unleaded petrol (ie NOTHING else is allowed what-so-ever) when hydrogen and electric cars already exist, but these cars must also have a petrol engine for some absurd reason...
So because the majority want full censorship for themselves and they want to push it on everyone else when a technological solution clearly exists that would make everyone happy, that means the majority is clearly right does it? If everyone wants censorship then fine, but why not use the V-Chip or inverse-V-Chip?
I thought they also delt with anti-monopolisation of media and basic standards etc..?
Sounds like censorship? It is censorship. And not only is it unconstitutional, its also totally pointless because a technological solution exists that would make both sides happy. I think its probably the case that the pro-censorship side not only wants censorship for themselves, but also wants to force it on everyone else because "no-one should be allowed to watch that filth" - sounds like facism? yep it is.
I don't think this guy is the problem, the FCC is there like it or not to regulate things, which is fair enough as long as they don't do stupid things. Unfortunately the FCC is staffed by total incompetent jack-offs who sit around all day smoking crack and fundamentalist Christians who are so offended by someone so much as saying crap that they would ultimately like the death penalty for swearing. Now you could say its damn lucky that these people were carefully 'put' out of harms way from any real government jobs, or you could argue that the FCC is way way too much power for them. Id go for the latter and recommend mass lay-offs and get some people in who actually have a clue. It might seem that the complainer is just another fundie' pissed off about people swearing, but I think (i hope, otherwise he is just a total dick wad) he was just trying to push his business interests - his logic being that if his radio station gets fined for the audio equivalent of Jacksons' nipple (not even both!) then why should satellite radio get off scot free, because that would create an unfair business advantage and lock him out of many shows. However, he probably realised that asking the FCC to just stop all censorship would be similar to asking the Saudi Royal family to grow up and stop cutting peoples limbs off like cavemen, so he figured why not go for the more likely option - cutting everyone's balls off - it seems that didn't quite work, which while being a good thing, is totally beside the point.
What a load of bullshit, this reminds me of the senator who after seeing the video of a marine shooting an injured insurgent in a mosque was outraged and said that embedded news teams should be banned! This is totally ridiculous - OF COURSE the playing field should be levelled, otherwise what is the fucking point of the FCC? The field should however (and this to me is like explaining that the earth goes around the sun) be levelled on the totally opposite direction - get rid of the bloody censorship altogether! WTF are these people smoking?
Now could someone please explain why a V-Chip like system (that either blocks out the audio/video when it gets the signal OR unblocks a scrambled audio/video when it gets the signal) has not been standardised to solve this stupid problem? All the FCC needs to do is find out how many people oppose censorship vs how many are in favour and then decide which system to use and therefore who has to buy new radios/tvs or adaptors if they want to take advantage of it, it really is that simple. Or just do what the rest of the world does and not get so anal about hearing people swear.
I find most LCDs in public libraries/net-cafes are just not good enough for porn, you just need a CRT and theres no way around it, its abit sad to see so many people switching and knowing they will never be able to enjoy a good porno again. Luckely CRTs are cheap and crappier (read: cheaper) net cafes still have them. But having said that, I did have a go on one of those flashy new Apple LCDs and the cleavage looked pretty good, that was until the rude security guard kicked me out of the shop.
We're not willing to accept some defects, let supply drop to a trickle..
A California court has approved a $2.6 million settlement between Diebold and the State of California and Alameda County. The state and county had sued Diebold for fraudulent claims about the security of its electronic voting machines. ..And this fixes the bugs, how?
Yes I read the rest of it. So now they will carry on using the same system (plus afew 'reports') and it will stay insecure. Kinda like the people who sue Tabaco companies and walk out of the court room already lighting up again.
'The disc will present itself as a CD-ROM to PCs, a Mac CD-ROM to Mac computers, a VCD to DVD players and CDDA disc to audio CD players. This multifunctional disc format offers full playability and therefore greater flexibility without lowering protection levels.' and 'By using a range of methodologies, including the construction of multiple protection layers, limiting the player accessibility to the provided player software, and encapsulating the red book audio content, XCP® successfully protects the content from unauthorised copying.'
And yes, the shift key will bypass all your hours and hours of pointless research, overblown 'technologies' and multiple orgasm dual-encrypted protection layers. I can safely assure you XCP® will NOT successfully protect Jack Shit from unauthorised bullshitting, and I can only wish First4Porn good luck in flogging this crap to the record labels before they realise they cant cancel the license... Actually I was wondering if I couldnt just make up a CD DRM system and give it lots of buzzwords about encryption and then sell it and skip the country? Any thoughts?
Because its way way cheaper: a multi-core CPU will be cheaper to mass produce for the same processing power as one CPU made in one factory and a totally different design of GPU on a separate card made in a separate factory. Also the interface will be much quicker because everything is on the same chip. The biggest reason to do it would be that your PC could divert its power depending on the application - if you were playing it a game then more cores would be used for graphics, where as if you were rendering for a movie, you could loose all the graphics resources and use those cores for something useful. PCs like to be general purpose, and the more purpose built hardware you have the more it costs and the more limited you are, the trend recently has been to do more in software and that would continue with multi-core CPUs.
Granted RAM speed would be an issue but im sure it would be fixed - graphics basically needs a certain speed of memory so it can get a certain frame rate and eventually that speed will be the same as system memory - maybe the cost saving will mean you can have super-fast RAM for all the system to use (and it won't be wasted when not using the graphics card) older on-motherboard graphics cards used to share with the system memory and it worked. Failing that, your new motherboard design could just let you stick your fast RAM next to the slow RAM and let the CPU cores choose which one they want to use? I think if Intel/AMD can get the cost of multi-core down low enough they would be able to put ATI etc out of business.
If we're talking multiple cores then it would basically be a copy of the same core lots of times on a wafer, if one or two didnt work the chip could just ignore them and be sold cheaper?
Touché, however, I observed your use of punctuation in jest and my retort was a witty counter-punch on two levels, the first portraying the ignorance of the common man in response to correction of Kings English and the second being the recursive use of sarcasm to the goal of punctuating your original point.
Yeah I think so? and im pretty sure the sentence "Do you think such usage is correct." requires a question mark?
Supercomputers my ass, when will Intel admit that the real driving force behind faster hardware is lots of gibbing and blood splashing around the screen in real-time! This sounds like a very good idea and one that could maybe lead to a demise in separate graphics cards? your graphics could be handled on a separate core that gets its instructions from another core that maybe even separates collision detection and AI into other cores? I know purpose built hardware is always going to be faster at its job, but if this becomes much cheaper, it will just be more economical to ditch your graphics card and get more cores?
Pollution Monitoring Frequencies Subject to Weather..
eh.. il go now.
Don't bother asking the FCC for help - they're too worried about someone saying fuck or showing their tits. Seriously tho, what sort of idiot would actually sell these frequencies if they knew what they were used for?
I seriously think I should have gone into the finance industry instead of tech. After all its just another stupid system with rules you can learn and twist to your advantage, damnit I should have realised early on that the only job that matters is the one that makes the most money - hope its not too late to get some good profits..
Well I guess if you can't fix your own bugs, just buy someone who can eh?
You mean he forgot Poland? er i mean Russia.. close enough... im here all week?
The EU is making the exact same plans on our side, if you can take Galileo, we can take GPS. Anyone have a problem with that? huh?