Last year, there were reports that the EZ Pass consortium was doing just that -- and that tickets were being handed out in Pennsylvania.
I -thought- that the tickets were only being handed out if a passenger rushes through a checkpoint at a higher speed limit than what's posted (5 MPH in PA? At least Jersey has it right with 15MPH), but a former coworker insisted that they were now checking average driving speed based upon times between two gates.
Of course, I've yet to receieve a ticket myself, either from speeding through a gate (5mph is ridiculously slow -- other cars grab tickets at a faster speed), or from speeding between two gates. Of course, it usually helps that I stop to refill gas & grab dinner at a rest stop:)
Just an observation, notice they wanna stamp out fair use, but definatly want free speech to reign? check the "Freedom of speach" link on their site:
Of course. The RIAA knows that one of its biggest enemies is the FCC. If the FCC says "No minors shall be sold music containing any more than X number of vulgarities"; the RIAA immediately suffers as a result of losing a potential direct sale.
If the FCC says "Everybody can purchase and listen to whomever they want", the RIAA benefits, as now that 8 year old kid will be able to buy the RIAA-sanctioned Rap album about killing police officers.
There's also lots implied meanings in the article that people seem to be taking at extreme literal.
For example, the Government is considering using Passport Technology. That's a gigantic difference from using Passport itself.
Microsoft would like to see itself as the provider of these services through its existing applications. Considering the openness of these services, do you really think the government would consider a straight-foward integration? No; I can guarantee every single reader on this board that even IF a deal should develop, it will consist of Microsoft building the government its own service. Perhaps this new service will be based upon the technology, but it's highly doubtful that it'll be based upon the existing service.
In short -- Microsoft Passport does not, and would not equal U.S. Passport; despite what nearly every single foaming-at-the-mouth Slashdot reader thinks, and what Microsoft would like to see.
..Where Amy went car shopping at that "Malfunctioning Eddies" or wherever; and upon being sold a car (after haggling for it at a HIGHER price), the owner-robot exploded?
Why do I get the impression that there's quite a few Oracle employees who just exploded; and that California is going to be mightily pissed when they find that their new Oracle Software isn't going to come with quite as much Eagle as the salesmen promised...
Well, we know why *cough* *Hillary Rosen* *cough*; but come on, audio piped digitally through a sound card sounds like ass compared to pure audio straight from the CD drive.
IANAProfesisonal MP3 ripper; but remove access to the analog path, and you're only alternative is the digital; which can be secured (read: DRM) from both a hardware and software perspective.
An analogy I've always liked is a take on the old Guns-Don't-Kill-People argument.
It's perfectly legal to buy a handgun. It's perfectly legal to buy bullets. It's perfectly legal to use the two together. It is, however, very illegal to use the two together in certain conditions.
However, the Government does not mandate the crippling of potential gun owners' hands in order to decrease one's killing capacity. Nor does the government mandate that guns be as inaccurate as possible in order to stem victims being hit by bullets. Our Government says Here. Buy this gun. Do what you want with it. But if you use it to break the law, you're going to jail.
That's how most of our laws are, right now. Ex post facto -- you break them, you do the punishment. The RIAA/MPAA wants to undermine this situation, and prevent people from breaking the law. We already tried this once.
It was called prohibition.
The only way this bill will pass is if people aren't educated about the facts, and don't speak out against it.
It's incredibly admirable to see companies such as Gateway take a stand against the SSCA/CDCPBUATNAUWHATEVERTHEHELL; it's even moreso to see them want to educate the public on their rights in this area.
Back when e-mail was invented, say, in 1623 (I'm too lazy to do actual research), people used it as a basis of instant communication between two or more parties.
(Some people used it as a basis of communication between only one party; however, these people were usually either the types who needed to write themselves little sticky notes, or they had disassociative identity disorder.)
Considering how small the 'Internet' was back during the days of the first e-mail (I use quotes because, again, I've not done my research; and I'm uncertain whether e-mail or the 'net itself came first), e-mail was developed with a very open set of rules:
I create a server.
I set up a few accounts.
I open a port to allow for e-mails to be sent to me.
People connect to my computer, write me a message, and then magically disappear.
In time, relaying was invented, and was implemented such that the existing mail servers could be used as relay points -- I send an e-mail from my computer, it gets bounced around until it reaches its recipient.
Thus, the entire idea of e-mail.
I hate to say it, but... This world of e-mail is greatly polluted. I'm not talking about Gulf of Mexico polluted -- this is pre-1972 Lake Erie polluted.
So... Why not re-invent the wheel? We've been so concerned with building filtering applications, and layers upon layers over the basic SNMP protocol that we've forgotten that no matter how many bridges we build, we're still going to be able to look down and see the same polluted water.
With this in mind, I call for a new type of e-mail service to be offered by various providers. One that explicitly denies old protocol e-mails. Something akin to Internet2, but for the public masses. Built-in encryption, a prerequisite (as well as several mechanisms) to determine that not only is the sender valid, but the router its sent from is uncompromised.
While this won't solve all the problems associated with spam, it'll certainly alleviate them. With a protocol designed from the ground up to disallow things such as anonymous e-mails or misrepresented e-mail addresses; as well as several other measures which would make for not only for a secure, but unpolluted e-mail atmosphere, we can abandon the current system which has become so polluted with the waste, filth, and garbage known as 'spam'.
To anybody who says that Netscape should have just made a better browser and competed better: let's play a game of Monopoly! Except I'm changing the rules a little bit. I get to start with all the money I've ever won from every other game of Monopoly I've ever played (six figures by now), while you start with the standard $1500. This means that every property I land on, I can immediately buy and build hotels on, while you've got to work
True, except your point is completely invalid.
Both Microsoft and AOL TW are multi-billion dollar companies. AOL TW is nothing short of a multimedia conglomerate with its roots in every major form of media, the arts, entertainment, and technology.
Your point would be valid if, and only if, Netscape was still being developed by either a small private company or small collective of individuals. It isn't. If AOLTW's would have willed it, they could have backed Netscape to create the premeir Browser. Instead, they're using Netscape to attempt to make the most amount of money from the least amount of work.
I want this to be taken in zero offense whatsoever, but the fact that your post is currently at a +3 is testament to the inherent flaws of the/. moderation system.
Which, in the current light of this thread, is quite ironic. And humorous.
Which would mean little more than a binary system, correct? Binary systems are being discovered all the time, so I don't really see the big deal in this.
MIS will prepare you for a role as a management-type person in an MIS department -- you'll be working alot with reports, creating and presenting them to various levels of the Organizational Chart.
IS will prepare you for roles between a Developer (IMO, a dumb-downed developer/coder, where all programming is done in a strict by-the-letters fashon, and the developer is only responsible for a few modules in an overall system) to a Systems Analyst, which will put you in front of both the developers and the end users, determining requirements, and creating an overall plan for system creation, design, development, and implementation. Analysts typically won't get their hands wet with programming, but have been known from time to time to sit down and write module or two for a system.
CS will prepare for, for the most part, coding jobs. CS grads are usually brought into companies as contractors, and paid outrageous sums of money. The downside is that they also mean nothing to the company in general, and (and sadly, I'm taught this in my IS courses), are viewed as a 'resource', not an employee. CS grads are given enough experience to do just about everything there is with computers, but from my experience, there are quite a few who lack the interpersonal skills required to be a project leader or Systems Analyst.
What part of the bill of rights prevents such an action?
If you live in the US, you have a unique serial number attached to your persona which is used for more purposes than you can imagine. What part of the constitution gives us the right to anonymity?
I'm beginning to doubt the performance ratings. The 17M rates at 40.9 fps for Max Payne at 1024x768x16, and 79.5 fps for Q3 at 1024x768x32. It also says for relative performance that in Q3, the 17M outperforms the GF2Go by 5x, and in Max Payne by 3.5x. I know for a fact that this cannot be the case, because I have an Inspiron 8000.
Here are the benchmarks for my system:
Q3 1024x768x32: 49.7. High Detail.
Max Payne 1024x768x16: (no FPS display, definitely playable, I'd say ~24). Max Detail.
The system is a 1ghz/256M running Windows 2000. Unless NVidia's benchmarks were done on say, a 500mhz laptop, I'd imagine much better performance than what they'd note; especially nothing that NONE of the benchmarks broke the 100 fps mark, when according to my numbers, they should have creamed it (Q3 1024 at 5X GF2 should have been 250 fps, and Max Payne should have been near 90).
Re:Did you expect any differently?
on
$1200 Cheap!
·
· Score: 2
In both situations, consumers went/will go to buy a product, and they wouldn't/will not let you buy that product without paying for some extra perhipherals that you may or may not want.
Back when the NES was released, if you went to an Toys R' Us, K-B Toys, or your local favorite big chain of toy stores and DEMANDED that they sell you a bare-bones NES console, they would have kicked you out of the store.
Hell, if you'd even READ the article synopsis, it is saying that MS is encouraging, not forcing retailers to do this.
Gibson constantly plugs Zone Alarm, so it's not suprising that people who don't read carefully would think that Zone Alarm is a GRC product, not a Zone Labs product.
If Gibson wrote Zone Alarm, it'd look as ugly as hell, have lots of BIG and alternating fonts, but be less than 300k in size, written in ASM, and fast as hell.
I heard that Ford makes $15,000 on every Explorer sold.
So I'm planning on stealing an Explorer, and sending Ford a check for $13,000. If I'm strapped for cash at the time, I'll arrange a payment plan with my offshore bankers.
Heh... the BLaw class I took seems to be paying off.
If the contract changes, there must be new consideration, roughly defined as a legal benefit and burden for both parties. Since the new terms are not only oppressive, but imply no new benefit to the customers, the new contract is invalid. Not only that, but the customers, because of a change in the terms of the contract, would have to resign the contract if they were to agree to the new terms.
What he's doing is wrong (fraud), and he can be sued for punitive damages. Think that $76,000 wired mentioned is alot? That's just the tip of the iceburg.
I.A.N.A. Contract L., so anyone who knows more about this than I please feel free to correct me.
Don't wait, for a limited time, the SDMI is selling advertisements as digital music watermarks! Listen to these satisfied customers:
Rob Malda: "Well, I wasn't too sure about supporting SDMI and the RIAA and all, but ever since I had my voice recorded saying "come to slashdot.org" over and over again on the newest Brittney Spears album, my site has been overpopulated by teeny-boppers! But damn if I'm not enjoying the extra revenue from banner ads!"
Imagine if this was used for political purposes... Hell, the canidates wouldn't even need to campaign, all they'd need to do is purchase subliminal message time in popular music!
"You will vote for Al Gore"
"We will vote for Al Gore"
TheReverand, if that is your real name, I believe that IHBT, but oh well. I think you're missing the point though.
We've made so much technological progress over the years. In the course of 100 years, we've seen the advance of the motion picture from flipbooks (the original idea for the movie projector came from Edison looking at a few pictures of a guy sneezing) to movies encrypted in a series of 1's and 0's -- 2 complete different spectra. Never before did we ever once have the ability to view movies in crystal clarity -- hell, until recently, movies were just made up of a bunch of individual pictures pieced together. Now they're lucid things, with more channels of sound than you can shake a stick at.
The point is whether or not we need to see movies -- yes, we can go outside and forsake movies completely; the point is that now that these formats are released, they can't try to go and cover up their mistakes. Let the information be free, publish the CSS encryption routine. It's this kind of stuff that the RIAA is doing right now really impedes the progress of technology.
I enjoy fresh air, real life, but I also enjoy state of the art movies.
I hate to burst your bubble, but to quote the old axiom, "the genie is out of the bottle, and he ain't going back". When the RIAA released their first DVD, I'm sure they realized that if they did not achieve 100% market availability, people would attempt to penetrate the markets they did not initially cover -- the linux community, et. al. It's the RIAA's fault for being so shortsighted that people wouldn't demand a DVD player for linux -- thus DeCSS was born.
Slashdot Mirror
Last year, there were reports that the EZ Pass consortium was doing just that -- and that tickets were being handed out in Pennsylvania.
:)
I -thought- that the tickets were only being handed out if a passenger rushes through a checkpoint at a higher speed limit than what's posted (5 MPH in PA? At least Jersey has it right with 15MPH), but a former coworker insisted that they were now checking average driving speed based upon times between two gates.
Of course, I've yet to receieve a ticket myself, either from speeding through a gate (5mph is ridiculously slow -- other cars grab tickets at a faster speed), or from speeding between two gates. Of course, it usually helps that I stop to refill gas & grab dinner at a rest stop
Just an observation, notice they wanna stamp out fair use, but definatly want free speech to reign? check the "Freedom of speach" link on their site:
Of course. The RIAA knows that one of its biggest enemies is the FCC. If the FCC says "No minors shall be sold music containing any more than X number of vulgarities"; the RIAA immediately suffers as a result of losing a potential direct sale.
If the FCC says "Everybody can purchase and listen to whomever they want", the RIAA benefits, as now that 8 year old kid will be able to buy the RIAA-sanctioned Rap album about killing police officers.
Thank God somebody else reads the article.
There's also lots implied meanings in the article that people seem to be taking at extreme literal.
For example, the Government is considering using Passport Technology. That's a gigantic difference from using Passport itself.
Microsoft would like to see itself as the provider of these services through its existing applications. Considering the openness of these services, do you really think the government would consider a straight-foward integration? No; I can guarantee every single reader on this board that even IF a deal should develop, it will consist of Microsoft building the government its own service. Perhaps this new service will be based upon the technology, but it's highly doubtful that it'll be based upon the existing service.
In short -- Microsoft Passport does not, and would not equal U.S. Passport; despite what nearly every single foaming-at-the-mouth Slashdot reader thinks, and what Microsoft would like to see.
..Where Amy went car shopping at that "Malfunctioning Eddies" or wherever; and upon being sold a car (after haggling for it at a HIGHER price), the owner-robot exploded?
Why do I get the impression that there's quite a few Oracle employees who just exploded; and that California is going to be mightily pissed when they find that their new Oracle Software isn't going to come with quite as much Eagle as the salesmen promised...
Yes, but... but.. When was the last time you ever had to tell someone to RTFM for notepad???
*Universe Explodes*
Whoa. Why? I didn't notice that till now.
Well, we know why *cough* *Hillary Rosen* *cough*; but come on, audio piped digitally through a sound card sounds like ass compared to pure audio straight from the CD drive.
IANAProfesisonal MP3 ripper; but remove access to the analog path, and you're only alternative is the digital; which can be secured (read: DRM) from both a hardware and software perspective.
An analogy I've always liked is a take on the old Guns-Don't-Kill-People argument.
It's perfectly legal to buy a handgun. It's perfectly legal to buy bullets. It's perfectly legal to use the two together. It is, however, very illegal to use the two together in certain conditions.
However, the Government does not mandate the crippling of potential gun owners' hands in order to decrease one's killing capacity. Nor does the government mandate that guns be as inaccurate as possible in order to stem victims being hit by bullets. Our Government says Here. Buy this gun. Do what you want with it. But if you use it to break the law, you're going to jail.
That's how most of our laws are, right now. Ex post facto -- you break them, you do the punishment. The RIAA/MPAA wants to undermine this situation, and prevent people from breaking the law. We already tried this once.
It was called prohibition.
The only way this bill will pass is if people aren't educated about the facts, and don't speak out against it.
It's incredibly admirable to see companies such as Gateway take a stand against the SSCA/CDCPBUATNAUWHATEVERTHEHELL; it's even moreso to see them want to educate the public on their rights in this area.
Not likely; but we may see something akin to the PSOne with PlayStation 2 hardware.
Back when e-mail was invented, say, in 1623 (I'm too lazy to do actual research), people used it as a basis of instant communication between two or more parties.
(Some people used it as a basis of communication between only one party; however, these people were usually either the types who needed to write themselves little sticky notes, or they had disassociative identity disorder.)
Considering how small the 'Internet' was back during the days of the first e-mail (I use quotes because, again, I've not done my research; and I'm uncertain whether e-mail or the 'net itself came first), e-mail was developed with a very open set of rules:
I create a server.
I set up a few accounts.
I open a port to allow for e-mails to be sent to me.
People connect to my computer, write me a message, and then magically disappear.
In time, relaying was invented, and was implemented such that the existing mail servers could be used as relay points -- I send an e-mail from my computer, it gets bounced around until it reaches its recipient.
Thus, the entire idea of e-mail.
I hate to say it, but... This world of e-mail is greatly polluted. I'm not talking about Gulf of Mexico polluted -- this is pre-1972 Lake Erie polluted.
So... Why not re-invent the wheel? We've been so concerned with building filtering applications, and layers upon layers over the basic SNMP protocol that we've forgotten that no matter how many bridges we build, we're still going to be able to look down and see the same polluted water.
With this in mind, I call for a new type of e-mail service to be offered by various providers. One that explicitly denies old protocol e-mails. Something akin to Internet2, but for the public masses. Built-in encryption, a prerequisite (as well as several mechanisms) to determine that not only is the sender valid, but the router its sent from is uncompromised.
While this won't solve all the problems associated with spam, it'll certainly alleviate them. With a protocol designed from the ground up to disallow things such as anonymous e-mails or misrepresented e-mail addresses; as well as several other measures which would make for not only for a secure, but unpolluted e-mail atmosphere, we can abandon the current system which has become so polluted with the waste, filth, and garbage known as 'spam'.
Thank you.
To anybody who says that Netscape should have just made a better browser and competed better: let's play a game of Monopoly! Except I'm changing the rules a little bit. I get to start with all the money I've ever won from every other game of Monopoly I've ever played (six figures by now), while you start with the standard $1500. This means that every property I land on, I can immediately buy and build hotels on, while you've got to work
True, except your point is completely invalid.
Both Microsoft and AOL TW are multi-billion dollar companies. AOL TW is nothing short of a multimedia conglomerate with its roots in every major form of media, the arts, entertainment, and technology.
Your point would be valid if, and only if, Netscape was still being developed by either a small private company or small collective of individuals. It isn't. If AOLTW's would have willed it, they could have backed Netscape to create the premeir Browser. Instead, they're using Netscape to attempt to make the most amount of money from the least amount of work.
I want this to be taken in zero offense whatsoever, but the fact that your post is currently at a +3 is testament to the inherent flaws of the /. moderation system.
Which, in the current light of this thread, is quite ironic. And humorous.
Which would mean little more than a binary system, correct? Binary systems are being discovered all the time, so I don't really see the big deal in this.
Other than the pretty photographs.
The way I understand it:
MIS will prepare you for a role as a management-type person in an MIS department -- you'll be working alot with reports, creating and presenting them to various levels of the Organizational Chart.
IS will prepare you for roles between a Developer (IMO, a dumb-downed developer/coder, where all programming is done in a strict by-the-letters fashon, and the developer is only responsible for a few modules in an overall system) to a Systems Analyst, which will put you in front of both the developers and the end users, determining requirements, and creating an overall plan for system creation, design, development, and implementation. Analysts typically won't get their hands wet with programming, but have been known from time to time to sit down and write module or two for a system.
CS will prepare for, for the most part, coding jobs. CS grads are usually brought into companies as contractors, and paid outrageous sums of money. The downside is that they also mean nothing to the company in general, and (and sadly, I'm taught this in my IS courses), are viewed as a 'resource', not an employee. CS grads are given enough experience to do just about everything there is with computers, but from my experience, there are quite a few who lack the interpersonal skills required to be a project leader or Systems Analyst.
What part of the bill of rights prevents such an action?
If you live in the US, you have a unique serial number attached to your persona which is used for more purposes than you can imagine. What part of the constitution gives us the right to anonymity?
I'm beginning to doubt the performance ratings. The 17M rates at 40.9 fps for Max Payne at 1024x768x16, and 79.5 fps for Q3 at 1024x768x32. It also says for relative performance that in Q3, the 17M outperforms the GF2Go by 5x, and in Max Payne by 3.5x. I know for a fact that this cannot be the case, because I have an Inspiron 8000.
Here are the benchmarks for my system:
Q3 1024x768x32: 49.7. High Detail.
Max Payne 1024x768x16: (no FPS display, definitely playable, I'd say ~24). Max Detail.
The system is a 1ghz/256M running Windows 2000. Unless NVidia's benchmarks were done on say, a 500mhz laptop, I'd imagine much better performance than what they'd note; especially nothing that NONE of the benchmarks broke the 100 fps mark, when according to my numbers, they should have creamed it (Q3 1024 at 5X GF2 should have been 250 fps, and Max Payne should have been near 90).
Gnome itself has GNU in the acronym.
;)
So does GNU
Someone mods their case with the Drempels look. :)
In both situations, consumers went/will go to buy a product, and they wouldn't/will not let you buy that product without paying for some extra perhipherals that you may or may not want.
Back when the NES was released, if you went to an Toys R' Us, K-B Toys, or your local favorite big chain of toy stores and DEMANDED that they sell you a bare-bones NES console, they would have kicked you out of the store.
Hell, if you'd even READ the article synopsis, it is saying that MS is encouraging, not forcing retailers to do this.
And have Sephiroth steal it and kill Aeris? Are you insane??
Gibson constantly plugs Zone Alarm, so it's not suprising that people who don't read carefully would think that Zone Alarm is a GRC product, not a Zone Labs product.
If Gibson wrote Zone Alarm, it'd look as ugly as hell, have lots of BIG and alternating fonts, but be less than 300k in size, written in ASM, and fast as hell.
I heard that Ford makes $15,000 on every Explorer sold.
So I'm planning on stealing an Explorer, and sending Ford a check for $13,000. If I'm strapped for cash at the time, I'll arrange a payment plan with my offshore bankers.
Problem solved.
Heh... the BLaw class I took seems to be paying off.
If the contract changes, there must be new consideration, roughly defined as a legal benefit and burden for both parties. Since the new terms are not only oppressive, but imply no new benefit to the customers, the new contract is invalid. Not only that, but the customers, because of a change in the terms of the contract, would have to resign the contract if they were to agree to the new terms.
What he's doing is wrong (fraud), and he can be sued for punitive damages. Think that $76,000 wired mentioned is alot? That's just the tip of the iceburg.
I.A.N.A. Contract L., so anyone who knows more about this than I please feel free to correct me.
Juicy Backwards Masking!
Don't wait, for a limited time, the SDMI is selling advertisements as digital music watermarks! Listen to these satisfied customers:
Rob Malda: "Well, I wasn't too sure about supporting SDMI and the RIAA and all, but ever since I had my voice recorded saying "come to slashdot.org" over and over again on the newest Brittney Spears album, my site has been overpopulated by teeny-boppers! But damn if I'm not enjoying the extra revenue from banner ads!"
Imagine if this was used for political purposes... Hell, the canidates wouldn't even need to campaign, all they'd need to do is purchase subliminal message time in popular music!
"You will vote for Al Gore"
"We will vote for Al Gore"
TheReverand, if that is your real name, I believe that IHBT, but oh well. I think you're missing the point though.
We've made so much technological progress over the years. In the course of 100 years, we've seen the advance of the motion picture from flipbooks (the original idea for the movie projector came from Edison looking at a few pictures of a guy sneezing) to movies encrypted in a series of 1's and 0's -- 2 complete different spectra. Never before did we ever once have the ability to view movies in crystal clarity -- hell, until recently, movies were just made up of a bunch of individual pictures pieced together. Now they're lucid things, with more channels of sound than you can shake a stick at.
The point is whether or not we need to see movies -- yes, we can go outside and forsake movies completely; the point is that now that these formats are released, they can't try to go and cover up their mistakes. Let the information be free, publish the CSS encryption routine. It's this kind of stuff that the RIAA is doing right now really impedes the progress of technology.
I enjoy fresh air, real life, but I also enjoy state of the art movies.
I hate to burst your bubble, but to quote the old axiom, "the genie is out of the bottle, and he ain't going back". When the RIAA released their first DVD, I'm sure they realized that if they did not achieve 100% market availability, people would attempt to penetrate the markets they did not initially cover -- the linux community, et. al. It's the RIAA's fault for being so shortsighted that people wouldn't demand a DVD player for linux -- thus DeCSS was born.
Sorry man, but you're just wrong.