Why exactly do I pay a tax on CDR media? I figure for every blank CD I purchase I'm allowed to download around 9 songs, since the tax already assumes that I'm pirating songs, even if i'm burning music I created!!!
For one, consider creating a standard image for all of your machines and have them install using pxeboot or etherboot. If any of the machines get hosed, you can reboot them and force them to reinstall their OS in 5 minutes.
It seems to me that fiber is a waste of money. You implement gigE using copper. I would think that most of the data transfer is going to be the scene data and then an image transfered back.
The company i used to work for was developing a global illumination raytracer and we created a program that tiled the output image; however, it still needed the entire scene so it could calculate all of the lighting and rays. I don't know what rendering software exists nowdays so I can't give any advice there.
(I think this image was created using our renderer using environmental lighting because i vaguely remember this scene (while we were fixing bugs for them) from this company before we went under in 2002)
I get the point that they threaten a lengthy and costly lawsuit to coerce people into settling, but can't they be countersued for attorneys' fees and damages for a frivolous lawsuit?
I mean they are suing with zero evidence of signal thieft!! If i lease satelite broadcast time, am i allowed to sue every single person that purchases any type of satelite equipment without fear of paying for their lawyer fees?
Well, #4 is just as possible with barcodes. What if you buy a gatorade or soda at a store with your credit card and someone shoots a laser across the street and views the barcode on your gaterade or soda?
RFID == barcodes.
The only difference is you can read the tag using radio waves instead of a laser. Have you any idea of the ranges involved with reading these tags? They are usually measured in feet not yards to put it in perspective. Maybe someday they will each be battery powered so they can transmit on their own power, but not for a long time. Lots of money is being developed for unpowered, "passive" tags.
The only information they can tie to these tags is *gasp* information you have already given to them in one form or another! If you give them your finanicial information then i'm sure they can use the RFID tag you purchased as a key into a database if they were really so inclinded.
Generally the only information that is going to be tied to the tag is that your bag of Meow Mix was manufactured in a plant in Mexico on May 25th.
"Were licensing fees prohibitive for mass-scale introduction of RFID tags, personal privacy would be safer."
ROTFLMFAO
Because licensing would prevent what exactly? Identity theift? The fact that credit card companies and banks collect information on me? Would it stop websites from cookie-ing my browser? People spying through my windows? Eliminate the need for my tinfoil hat?
Have you any clue about the signal strength of passive rfid tags, which i'm assuming you're talking about? They are powered by a tag reader that is required to keep it's output power underneath FCC standards and then they transmit back using the power provided by that reader. How hard exactly do you think it would be to jam the readers from hearing a reply from these unpowered tags?
Ok, that felt better. +5 for being insightful? Anyway, with all of that out of the way, there are some privacy issues involved but to make it a black and white case that RFID tags are EVIL is the kind of overgeneraliztions used by karma whores on slashdot...oh.....
That's amazing. I would have thought the brain pliable enough to adjust to the vertical separation when calculating disparity between the right and left images. Kind of like that experiment where they made someone wear glasses the flipped their vision upside down. After a couple of days, they could see normally b/c the brain adjusted and re-righted the images.
Well, people's buying habits don't matter too much unless your part of the under 18 crowd.
Read what Crosby has to say about the music industry (the whole article is a good read):
"When was the last time you went to the record store? Ah-hah! That's, that's how it works, buddy. It's the kids go to the record store, and the kids are -- I was going to say "stupid," but they're not. They're just ignorant. And many of them will evolve, you know, from really dumb stuff, because the dumb music is sort of like a joke that's only funny once. And you can only go to a Justin Timberlake concert once. You go a second time, you see the same thing -- maybe they got new fireworks, but Justin ain't got nothing new to say, okay?
And, so, then you start to evolve up....But somewhere in there, you wind up loving music, and you evolve up to a level where you go after somebody who can really do it..."
Undefended copyrights are not lost. You are definitly thinking about trademark. The RIAA does not lose its right to enforce copyright at a later date if it doesn't enforce its copyrights right now.
Just don't be surprised when their networks DDOS your networks.
Well, i'd rather be secure but DoSed. Would you rather have your financial information harvested off your computer than have your internet link go down?
"'It's a myth that hackers find the holes,' said Nigel Beighton, who runs a research project for security firm Symantec that attempts to predict which vulnerabilities will be exploited next.
He said in many cases the appearance of a patch was the spur that kicked off activity around a particular vulnerability."
Shouldn't it be that patches are the only time there is any activity around a vulnerability? Because that is the only way any holes are discovered?
"'We have never had vulnerabilities exploited before the patch was known,' he said."
Right....
The first sentence is so ironic:
"Malicious hackers and vandals are lazy and wait for Microsoft to issue patches before they produce tools to work out how to exploit loopholes in Windows, say experts."
It should read:
Microsoft is lazy and waits a long time after hackers discover ways to exploit loopholes in Windows before issuing patches.
This sound more like an overbroad interpretation of the law then a problem with the spirit of the law.
Sending spam is intrusive and is directed at people and so to me would seem easier to get a judge to allow someone to sue in their local venue, while webserving is not targeted towards individual people so should not be allowed to be sued outside the webserver owner's state.
You bring up a good point and now i'm torn on the issue.;)
Why should it have to eliminate distinctions? If you break the law in another state you should always have to answer to the law in that state. Here's an idea: don't break the law in that state.
I don't see people getting upset b/c traffic laws are different in different states. For example, newspapers that have nationwide coverage and print juicy articles about someone can be sued in that person's state for libel since they do buisness in that state. Why should this change for email?
Yes. Yes. Exactly.
If people don't want email spam, why don't they move to a new system that requires some type of registration to enter into. I beleive there are companies already offering this system. Imagine that--a market solution without the interference of gov't!
I think when you sign up you have to set aside a certain amount of money in escrow, and if the receiver of your emails reports your email message as spam $.05 is deducted from your account, otherwise you are charged nothing.
It's not like someone who was really interested couldn't go back and find a paper copy or a copy in another Electronic archive.
Not if they didn't know it existed b/c it was stricken from the table of contents.
Memory Hole picked this article and issue for pure political gain.
Yeah, who do they think they are for picking on a major news provider for pulling orwellian tactics to remove traces of news stories that might not be popular with current public sentiment?
Besides who cares what an ex-Pres thought 5 yrs ago about Gulf War I?
I don't think people would care about what just any ex-Pres thought about the Gulf War 5 years ago. But i think alot of people would care about what the ex-Pres who was in office during the Gulf War thought about that war 5 years ago. Especially, when the current Pres is the son of the ex-Pres and inherited most of his daddy's advisors. And even more important when many of the arguements haven't changed since the essay was written.
" Not all creationists believe the universe was formed in 6 days. And by saying so you imply that creationism is totally inclusive of this concept. Not all creationists believe in the six day period. Not even all of the biblical creationists believe the 6 day idea. Some interpret the word "day" in the bible to mean a creative "period" that could span millions or even billions of years. And some creationists don't even believe in the Bible."
Hmmmmm. I think you've just explained exactly why creationism is not a scientifically accepted explanation. We need to teach creationism because it is such a great fictional story that can be interpreted any which way to explain how the world began. Thanks for clearing that one up for me. I can just see the tests:
Q. 1.) "How long did it take God to create the universe?"
A. 6 days
B. 7 days
C. 6 eons
D. However long you want to believe.
Who needs facts anyway? What do you mean a triangle doesn't have 5 sides? What i meant by five was actually what you call 3. Anything I tell you i read in my magic book should be interpreted to mean whatever the right answer actually is.
Why don't you scientific people understand???
btw, i understand it supposed to be 6 days, but i include the seventh b/c god was too tuckered out to do anything that day (pulling all nighters getting the product out), it might as well be included in the cost of creating, well, the whole universe. This must have been the day that Adam took a bite of that apple, since god was "resting."
Slashdot Mirror
Why exactly do I pay a tax on CDR media? I figure for every blank CD I purchase I'm allowed to download around 9 songs, since the tax already assumes that I'm pirating songs, even if i'm burning music I created!!!
What is non-standard? Thanks for the tip, but it still sux0rs that it takes quotes to force correct behavior.
that's so pathetic. i love how adults will try to justify it by saying, "but it's like 700 pages!"
i loathe and detest adults that feel the need to justify (to assholes) about reading a harry potter book.
For one, consider creating a standard image for all of your machines and have them install using pxeboot or etherboot. If any of the machines get hosed, you can reboot them and force them to reinstall their OS in 5 minutes.
It seems to me that fiber is a waste of money. You implement gigE using copper. I would think that most of the data transfer is going to be the scene data and then an image transfered back.
The company i used to work for was developing a global illumination raytracer and we created a program that tiled the output image; however, it still needed the entire scene so it could calculate all of the lighting and rays. I don't know what rendering software exists nowdays so I can't give any advice there.
(I think this image was created using our renderer using environmental lighting because i vaguely remember this scene (while we were fixing bugs for them) from this company before we went under in 2002)
I get the point that they threaten a lengthy and costly lawsuit to coerce people into settling, but can't they be countersued for attorneys' fees and damages for a frivolous lawsuit?
I mean they are suing with zero evidence of signal thieft!! If i lease satelite broadcast time, am i allowed to sue every single person that purchases any type of satelite equipment without fear of paying for their lawyer fees?
Well, #4 is just as possible with barcodes. What if you buy a gatorade or soda at a store with your credit card and someone shoots a laser across the street and views the barcode on your gaterade or soda?
RFID == barcodes.
The only difference is you can read the tag using radio waves instead of a laser. Have you any idea of the ranges involved with reading these tags? They are usually measured in feet not yards to put it in perspective. Maybe someday they will each be battery powered so they can transmit on their own power, but not for a long time. Lots of money is being developed for unpowered, "passive" tags.
The only information they can tie to these tags is *gasp* information you have already given to them in one form or another! If you give them your finanicial information then i'm sure they can use the RFID tag you purchased as a key into a database if they were really so inclinded.
Generally the only information that is going to be tied to the tag is that your bag of Meow Mix was manufactured in a plant in Mexico on May 25th.
Big deal!
Because licensing would prevent what exactly? Identity theift? The fact that credit card companies and banks collect information on me? Would it stop websites from cookie-ing my browser? People spying through my windows? Eliminate the need for my tinfoil hat?
Have you any clue about the signal strength of passive rfid tags, which i'm assuming you're talking about? They are powered by a tag reader that is required to keep it's output power underneath FCC standards and then they transmit back using the power provided by that reader. How hard exactly do you think it would be to jam the readers from hearing a reply from these unpowered tags?
Ok, that felt better. +5 for being insightful? Anyway, with all of that out of the way, there are some privacy issues involved but to make it a black and white case that RFID tags are EVIL is the kind of overgeneraliztions used by karma whores on slashdot...oh.....
That's amazing. I would have thought the brain pliable enough to adjust to the vertical separation when calculating disparity between the right and left images. Kind of like that experiment where they made someone wear glasses the flipped their vision upside down. After a couple of days, they could see normally b/c the brain adjusted and re-righted the images.
sounds like a PEBCAK error.
Speak for yourself....and don't you dare disagree with me.
Nope. I don't find the iRiver ugly either. Not sure where that comment came from.
Undefended copyrights are not lost. You are definitly thinking about trademark. The RIAA does not lose its right to enforce copyright at a later date if it doesn't enforce its copyrights right now.
Conditioner is Better!
i got: ihsudotmp
The first sentence is so ironic: It should read:
Microsoft is lazy and waits a long time after hackers discover ways to exploit loopholes in Windows before issuing patches.
Good point.
;)
This sound more like an overbroad interpretation of the law then a problem with the spirit of the law.
Sending spam is intrusive and is directed at people and so to me would seem easier to get a judge to allow someone to sue in their local venue, while webserving is not targeted towards individual people so should not be allowed to be sued outside the webserver owner's state.
You bring up a good point and now i'm torn on the issue.
Why should it have to eliminate distinctions? If you break the law in another state you should always have to answer to the law in that state. Here's an idea: don't break the law in that state.
I don't see people getting upset b/c traffic laws are different in different states. For example, newspapers that have nationwide coverage and print juicy articles about someone can be sued in that person's state for libel since they do buisness in that state. Why should this change for email?
Yes. Yes. Exactly. If people don't want email spam, why don't they move to a new system that requires some type of registration to enter into. I beleive there are companies already offering this system. Imagine that--a market solution without the interference of gov't!
I think when you sign up you have to set aside a certain amount of money in escrow, and if the receiver of your emails reports your email message as spam $.05 is deducted from your account, otherwise you are charged nothing.
And how does that prove it is illegal? Are you suggesting if you walk in the door you'll be arrested?
the tone of this article is ridiculous. Open source doesn't mean Public Domain!
Q. 1.) "How long did it take God to create the universe?"
A. 6 days
B. 7 days
C. 6 eons
D. However long you want to believe.
Who needs facts anyway? What do you mean a triangle doesn't have 5 sides? What i meant by five was actually what you call 3. Anything I tell you i read in my magic book should be interpreted to mean whatever the right answer actually is.
Why don't you scientific people understand???
btw, i understand it supposed to be 6 days, but i include the seventh b/c god was too tuckered out to do anything that day (pulling all nighters getting the product out), it might as well be included in the cost of creating, well, the whole universe. This must have been the day that Adam took a bite of that apple, since god was "resting."
I do like the fact that you are defensive enought that include Christians come to mind when you hear "religious zealots".