The thing is - I'd like to do this with a Linux server - which has the much larger drive, etc. I've tried it a couple different ways and haven't had any success so far.
Let me confirm what this guy says. I worked on DVD ECC a bit - there is a level of no return with it as well. It's also true that this stuff is going to come Mpeg 2 encoded (if not 4) as part of the standard - count on it. Heck - HDTV is already a compressed format over the air.
ECC can only get you so far- it is good for dealing with localized burst errors from the media. DVD's give you lots of errors too SUPRISE, but the ECC system (quite elaborate - much like that used for over the air transmissions by the way) is up to the task.
At some point - the tape WILL get messed up so that it exceeds the ability of the ECC to make up for the errors - and you get drop outs - nice BIG ones since it's going to be a compressed format!
Just for the record - the Cydra 5 was 128 bits. I know, I helped wire up every one of those registers;-)
The Trace architecture was extensible to 256 if memory serves.
Both machines were available in the mid 80's.
The fact that you couldn't grow these architectures and remain binary compatible was there achiles heel - consequently they were dead -ends both architecturally and commercially. It's the JIT application the problem that is revolutionary.
The Transmeta machine is a VLIW machine, almost the antipathy of CISC. It is closer to what is called "superscalar" machines than anything else.
The idea is that you have a 256 bit INSTRUCTION, not data path. There are several different functional units. Maybe one is a multiplier/divider, another is a floating point unit, another is an address calculator. Maybe you double up each of these resources when you go from 128 to 256 bits. The idea is that each functional unit gets it's own part of the instruction. VLIW stands for Very Large Instruction Word after all - not very large data path!
Next - you need fancy compilers, in this case it's the Transmeta just-in-time compilation that can schedule use of as many as possible of these functional units on a computation thread. Thus as the number of functional units goes up, the potential computation done per clock goes up.
I'm going to second the above post - having been in high-school at the same time (maybe a bit earlier in fact.) They said 15 to 20 years then. Hmmm - still seem to be putting gasoline into my car.
Now the vehicles ARE more gas efficient on the whole and the hybrid vehicles seem to be a reasonable next step for the US. They won't replace EVERY use, but should be good for commute cars and such.
I'm real hopeful for the fuel cell vehicles, but there is one BIG engineering problem to overcome. All these guys running around saying hydrogen fuel is the answer are nuts! Anyone besides me remember the Hindenberg????? It doesn't make sense to deploy a fuel even MORE explosive and harder to handle than gasoline? I think fuel cells become practical when they come up with an environmentally friendly way of cracking gasoline or some other "hol" down into hydrogen IN the vehicle. Then it becomes a good idea!
I do believe that feat is held by finland. Also the place with the most cell phones per capita. (Gee - wonder why it's the birthplace of our favorite OS too?;-)
As I recall - there was a recent court decision that invalidated any part of a EULA that prohibits selling of the software to a 2nd person assuming that the software has been removed from your machine. This was equated to reselling a book that you had purchased legally. So any EULA language that prohibits this is just so much hot air.
Hotels that Claim it but dont have it!
on
Hotels with Broadband?
·
· Score: 2, Informative
The Embassy suites in Tigard Oregon had it - but doesn't anymore. The provider went under. As far as I know, the adverts still claim the feature though. The staff WILL tell you it isn't there anymore if you ask about it while making the reserveration. (I get to stay there alot for the next few weeks:-(
A couple of points - California is under the 9th circuit which has previously held that code=speech. Not the case in other jurisdictions. So a state court saying it's speech is just going along with the 9th circuit.
The other point that is interesting is that the damn DVD CCA claims the secrets were stolen. No -they were reverse engineered. There is a BIG difference! That little point seems to be lost in the shuffle.
Stolen implies someone walked into a vendor that had the secret and swipped it some how. Taint the case. A teenager working on his computer at home worked it out. Hmm - doesn't that make it not a trade secret anymore?????
Uhm - there was no cable in the 1950's. If I recall my history correctly, cable came into being in the 60's. (The advantage of being an old fart!)
And another point to be made on the orginal topic of not having paid for local network programming though cable rates. I think it was the telcom act of 1995 that caused local cable companies to have to pay royalties to the local stations for carrying their signals. No free lunch for the cable companies anymore. Consequently, my cable fees DO pay for local programming directly. It is the over-the-air types that don't have to pay.
I've also been around since close to day one (some where around version 0.12 as I recall) I remember the fun round between Linus and Andy Tannenbaum on comp.os.minux. Anyway - Let me back up what you say here. Linus certainly used the tools - but he also used Minix as a building block (ever wonder why Linux supports the Minix file system) cause it came FIRST before ext1 or ext2 or ext3;-) So by Richard's argument it should be Gnu/Minux? Perhaps Minu/Linux? Who knows. Linus didn't even name the system - originally it was Freenix if memory served. The guy who ran the ftp site didn't like that and called it Linux. The name stuck.
The arguement I like best is - if it's GNU/Linux, why isn't it GNU/BSD? Is that perhaps because BSD came out before GNU?? Hmmm - inquiring minds want to know? How much of GNU was based on BSD if any? We know RMS doesn't like the one true editor VI so he had to come up with something else, but beyond that??? Maybe it should be BSD/Linux?
The whole point is silly really. Richard is making a VERY large ego play here. It doesn't become him or the Free software movement that he preports to lead.
He was trying to get the hurd working - and he's
still working on it.
He out-right lies in this one where he says that Linus
insisted on calling it Linux, etc. Linus didn't even
name the silly thing, the guy who ran the FTP site did!
He also seems to forget little things like X that make
a modern desktop possible. His arguements are specious and silly - as is
he most of the time.
From my point of view - one of the guys who owns this device - the court has ordered Sonic Blue to violate my privacy. They have been ordered to spy on me. No more or less than that. Can there court-ordered observation of my viewing habbits and use of this box be argued to be anything else?
So, if you do finally admit that they have been ordered to invade my privacy on behalf of the media industry - then even though it is a company doing the spying, it's at the government behest, and therefore the company is merely an agent of the government. It doesn't matter who gets the data, it's the government that ordered them to do it. Last time I heard, there is some expectation of privacy that I have of my home and papers unless I'm personally suspected of a crime. The government isn't allowed to go on fishing expeditions. That is ALL this really amounts too when looked at from the position of the stuckee.
Look - I have nothing to hide except the use of the 30 second advance button;-) Any copying of shows off the box have been to other media in my household, i.e. legally permitted fair-use (Hollywood - you REALLY need to except that you lost the betamax case..)
At the same time - I'm now subject to a court-ordered search of my premises without ever seeing the search warrant? That is what invasion of my data is considered isn't it??
And the distance from "a unique number" to someone sending me a nasty-gram insinuating that I've violated the DMCA, or copyright or whatever is how far?
I have one of these devices - and the agreement I had with Sonic Blue has been invalidated by the judge - not Sonic Blue, and I have NO recourse but to either turn the device off, or un-plug it. That SUCKS!
Let's look at this another way (as I'm a replay
owner too). The judge has ordered the company to
invade your privacy - Ever hear of the 4th ammendment???
The requirements for a search warrant are even close
to being met here! Now - the judge said that
our identities will be protected for the time
being... how nice.
Support the EFF - they are at least looking into
helping us. Whether they can or not is another
matter. I was a disinterested 3rd party to this
proceeding until the judge violated my rights.
Wait you say - doesn't a judge have the power to
do just that - yes they do, but it mustn't be
a global invasion like this, but specific and
for specific legal reasons. I gotta think that
this is wanting in that department. I sure
hope so.
Again - drop a check to the EFF. $10, or $20
or whatever you can afford. They seem to be the
only people concerned about this BS.
Okay guys - you're complaining about "no-one" having
the time or money to get this to the Supremes. Well - the
best bet is going to be the EFF.
Case in point - The judge in the Sonic Blue case has
just ordered the company to spy on me! The judge wants to
come into my house without issuing a proper search warrant and
determine my use of the Replay 4000 I own. The company has
to record what shows I watch and whether I time-shift, and
whether I skip commercials (of course I do;-) This information
will be slightly santized, i.e. my name won't be attached to
the data (yet..) That is suppose to make this invasion of privacy
better.
Now - I happen to have sent a check or two the EFF's
way. They're already aware of the situation. Time will
tell whether this nonsense stands. At least someone
is trying to fight this BS. Why don't you help them
in the fight??? Give them a few bucks to support their
diverse efforts!!!!
This is the ONLY way we're going to get the DMCA
and the up-coming Hollings bill defeated!
Let me add just a tad more information to this discussion.
As I recall from my E&M class (and I am an electronic
engineer) the depth of penetration for an arriving
wave is related to the wavelength(actually the
energy content of the photon is what we're
talking about..) So microwaves just don't penetrate
that far in relative to something like 100Meter
wave lengths.
Further, alot of the cell phones today are
spread spectrum phones - so they spread their
energy out - so the Watts/Hz is pretty small.
Lastly - when you consider the inverse square
law that applies to radiation of RF, then the guy
who has the phone against his head is ALOT more
at risk that the guy standing next to him or
someone standing down the car 5m away? The additive
issues of even a dozen phones isn't likely to
be an issue compared to the level you are exposed
to with the phone next to you.
I question the very first propisition here. Where in the Constitution, Bill of Rights or even the Declaration of Independence does it say that business is protected against competition or themselves for that matter? The laws are already quite satisfactory if not overly draconian (read DMCA bad here) concerning copyright already. What the MPAA and RIAA want is the equivalent of patents AND the government to do their dirty work for them. Copyright was NEVER intended to serve this function. For that matter - what about the rediculous extention of the copyright period?????
They have MORE than enough protection already. Tell them to develop NEW business models that work in today's infrastructure -not go to congress and cry all the time!
Seems to me that if folks dis-allow "deep linking" as policy, then the Internet powers-that-be should help them out by removing such addresses from the DNS registery to help them avoid this terrible deep linking problem.
This way they won't have to worry about anyone voiding their copyright.
As one other poster (at least) said - if you put content out there that isn't password protected, then IT'S PUBLIC INFORMATION. That is the whole IDEA of the internet in the first place.
Slashdot Mirror
The thing is - I'd like to do this with a Linux server - which has the much larger drive, etc.
I've tried it a couple different ways and haven't had any success so far.
Anyone else have any clues?
I found the daemon tools suggest wonderful - but
if it's Mac software? Does anyone sell or have
utilities for that platform???
Let me confirm what this guy says. I worked on DVD ECC a bit - there is a level of no return with it as well. It's also true that this stuff is going to come Mpeg 2 encoded (if not 4) as part of the standard - count on it. Heck - HDTV is already a compressed format over the air.
ECC can only get you so far- it is good for dealing with localized burst errors from the media. DVD's give you lots of errors too SUPRISE, but the ECC system (quite elaborate - much like that used for over the air transmissions by the way) is up to the task.
At some point - the tape WILL get messed up so that it exceeds the ability of the ECC to make up for the errors - and you get drop outs - nice BIG ones since it's going to be a compressed format!
Just for the record - the Cydra 5 was 128 bits. I know, I helped wire up every one of those registers ;-)
The Trace architecture was extensible to 256 if memory serves.
Both machines were available in the mid 80's.
The fact that you couldn't grow these architectures and remain binary compatible was there achiles heel - consequently they were dead -ends both architecturally and commercially. It's the JIT application the problem that is revolutionary.
This is basically completely wrong.
The Transmeta machine is a VLIW machine, almost the antipathy of CISC. It is closer to what is called "superscalar" machines than anything else.
The idea is that you have a 256 bit INSTRUCTION, not data path. There are several different functional units. Maybe one is a multiplier/divider, another is a floating point unit, another is an address calculator. Maybe you double up each of these resources when you go from 128 to 256 bits. The idea is that each functional unit gets it's own part of the instruction. VLIW stands for Very Large Instruction Word after all - not very large data path!
Next - you need fancy compilers, in this case it's the Transmeta just-in-time compilation that can schedule use of as many as possible of these functional units on a computation thread. Thus as the number of functional units goes up, the potential computation done per clock goes up.
I'm going to second the above post - having been in high-school at the same time (maybe a bit earlier in fact.) They said 15 to 20 years then. Hmmm - still seem to be putting gasoline into my car.
Now the vehicles ARE more gas efficient on the whole and the hybrid vehicles seem to be a reasonable next step for the US. They won't replace EVERY use, but should be good for commute cars and such.
I'm real hopeful for the fuel cell vehicles, but there is one BIG engineering problem to overcome. All these guys running around saying hydrogen fuel is the answer are nuts! Anyone besides me remember the Hindenberg????? It doesn't make sense to deploy a fuel even MORE explosive and harder to handle than gasoline? I think fuel cells become practical when they come up with an environmentally friendly way of cracking gasoline or some other "hol" down into hydrogen IN the vehicle. Then it becomes a good idea!
I do believe that feat is held by finland. Also the place with the most cell phones per capita. (Gee - wonder why it's the birthplace of our favorite OS too? ;-)
As I recall - there was a recent court decision that invalidated any part of a EULA that prohibits selling of the software to a 2nd person assuming that the software has been removed from your machine. This was equated to reselling a book that you had purchased legally. So any EULA language that prohibits this is just so much hot air.
The Embassy suites in Tigard Oregon had it - but doesn't anymore. The provider went under. As far as I know, the adverts still claim the feature though. The staff WILL tell you it isn't there anymore if you ask about it while making the reserveration. (I get to stay there alot for the next few weeks :-(
A couple of points - California is under the 9th circuit which has previously held that code=speech. Not the case in other jurisdictions. So a state court saying it's speech is just going along with the 9th circuit.
The other point that is interesting is that the damn DVD CCA claims the secrets were stolen. No -they were reverse engineered. There is a BIG difference! That little point seems to be lost in the shuffle.
Stolen implies someone walked into a vendor that had the secret and swipped it some how. Taint the case. A teenager working on his computer at home worked it out. Hmm - doesn't that make it not a trade secret anymore?????
Well - "You're wrong!" ;-)
Uhm - there was no cable in the 1950's. If I recall my history correctly, cable came into being in the 60's. (The advantage of being an old fart!)
And another point to be made on the orginal topic of not having paid for local network programming though cable rates. I think it was the telcom act of 1995 that caused local cable companies to have to pay royalties to the local stations for carrying their signals. No free lunch for the cable companies anymore. Consequently, my cable fees DO pay for local programming directly. It is the over-the-air types that don't have to pay.
Ed,
;-) So by Richard's argument it should be Gnu/Minux? Perhaps Minu/Linux? Who knows. Linus
I've also been around since close to day one (some where around version 0.12 as I recall) I remember the fun round between Linus and Andy Tannenbaum on comp.os.minux. Anyway - Let me back up what you
say here. Linus certainly used the tools - but
he also used Minix as a building block (ever wonder why Linux supports the Minix file system) cause it came FIRST before ext1 or ext2 or ext3
didn't even name the system - originally it was Freenix if memory served. The guy who ran the ftp site didn't like that and called it Linux. The name stuck.
The arguement I like best is - if it's GNU/Linux, why isn't it GNU/BSD? Is that perhaps because BSD came out before GNU?? Hmmm - inquiring minds want to know? How much of GNU was based on BSD if any? We know RMS doesn't like the one true editor VI so he had to come up with something else, but beyond that??? Maybe it should be BSD/Linux?
The whole point is silly really. Richard is making a VERY large ego play here. It doesn't become him or the Free software movement that he preports to lead.
Not so moose breath. There are other alternatives, and there were back then.
It's CERTAINLY true that GCC was a big improvement over other options. But it wasn't the only choice.
Lcc?
He was trying to get the hurd working - and he's still working on it.
He out-right lies in this one where he says that Linus insisted on calling it Linux, etc. Linus didn't even name the silly thing, the guy who ran the FTP site did!
He also seems to forget little things like X that make a modern desktop possible. His arguements are specious and silly - as is he most of the time.
The real problem is that the ones who can't tell the difference seem to be the ones we elect into office (or listen to Hollywood WAY to much...hmm...)
If parents would simply do their job as parents then there wouldn't be an issue here.
screwed is the appropriate response.
Fine - it happened discovery - so what.
;-) Any copying of shows off the box have been to other media in my household, i.e. legally permitted fair-use (Hollywood - you REALLY need to except that you lost the betamax case..)
From my point of view - one of the guys who owns this device - the court has ordered Sonic Blue to violate my privacy. They have been ordered to spy on me. No more or less than that. Can there court-ordered observation of my viewing habbits and use of this box be argued to be anything else?
So, if you do finally admit that they have been ordered to invade my privacy on behalf of the media industry - then even though it is a company doing the spying, it's at the government behest, and therefore the company is merely an agent of the government. It doesn't matter who gets the data, it's the government that ordered them to do it. Last time I heard, there is some expectation of privacy that I have of my home and papers unless I'm personally suspected of a crime. The government isn't allowed to go on fishing expeditions. That is ALL this really amounts too when looked at from the position of the stuckee.
Look - I have nothing to hide except the use of the 30 second advance button
At the same time - I'm now subject to a court-ordered search of my premises without ever seeing the search warrant? That is what invasion of my data is considered isn't it??
Tell me how it isn't the above?
And the distance from "a unique number" to someone sending me a nasty-gram insinuating that I've violated the DMCA, or copyright or whatever is how far?
I have one of these devices - and the agreement I had with Sonic Blue has been invalidated by the judge - not Sonic Blue, and I have NO recourse but to either turn the device off, or un-plug it. That SUCKS!
Let's look at this another way (as I'm a replay owner too). The judge has ordered the company to invade your privacy - Ever hear of the 4th ammendment??? The requirements for a search warrant are even close to being met here! Now - the judge said that our identities will be protected for the time being... how nice.
Support the EFF - they are at least looking into helping us. Whether they can or not is another matter. I was a disinterested 3rd party to this proceeding until the judge violated my rights. Wait you say - doesn't a judge have the power to do just that - yes they do, but it mustn't be a global invasion like this, but specific and for specific legal reasons. I gotta think that this is wanting in that department. I sure hope so.
Again - drop a check to the EFF. $10, or $20 or whatever you can afford. They seem to be the only people concerned about this BS.
Okay guys - you're complaining about "no-one" having the time or money to get this to the Supremes. Well - the best bet is going to be the EFF.
Case in point - The judge in the Sonic Blue case has just ordered the company to spy on me! The judge wants to come into my house without issuing a proper search warrant and determine my use of the Replay 4000 I own. The company has to record what shows I watch and whether I time-shift, and whether I skip commercials (of course I do ;-) This information
will be slightly santized, i.e. my name won't be attached to
the data (yet..) That is suppose to make this invasion of privacy
better.
Now - I happen to have sent a check or two the EFF's way. They're already aware of the situation. Time will tell whether this nonsense stands. At least someone is trying to fight this BS. Why don't you help them in the fight??? Give them a few bucks to support their diverse efforts!!!!
This is the ONLY way we're going to get the DMCA and the up-coming Hollings bill defeated!
Let me add just a tad more information to this discussion.
As I recall from my E&M class (and I am an electronic engineer) the depth of penetration for an arriving wave is related to the wavelength(actually the energy content of the photon is what we're talking about..) So microwaves just don't penetrate that far in relative to something like 100Meter wave lengths.
Further, alot of the cell phones today are spread spectrum phones - so they spread their energy out - so the Watts/Hz is pretty small.
Lastly - when you consider the inverse square law that applies to radiation of RF, then the guy who has the phone against his head is ALOT more at risk that the guy standing next to him or someone standing down the car 5m away? The additive issues of even a dozen phones isn't likely to be an issue compared to the level you are exposed to with the phone next to you.
I would be REAL suspicious of this guy's work.
mod this guy up!
I question the very first propisition here. Where in the Constitution, Bill of Rights or even the Declaration of Independence does it say that business is protected against competition or themselves for that matter? The laws are already quite satisfactory if not overly draconian (read DMCA bad here) concerning copyright already. What the MPAA and RIAA want is the equivalent of patents AND the government to do their dirty work for them. Copyright was NEVER intended to serve this function. For that matter - what about the rediculous extention of the copyright period?????
They have MORE than enough protection already. Tell them to develop NEW business models that work in today's infrastructure -not go to congress and cry all the time!
Seems to me that if folks dis-allow "deep linking" as policy, then the Internet powers-that-be should help them out by removing such addresses from the DNS registery to help them avoid this terrible deep linking problem.
This way they won't have to worry about anyone voiding their copyright.
As one other poster (at least) said - if you put content out there that isn't password protected, then IT'S PUBLIC INFORMATION. That is the whole IDEA of the internet in the first place.