Sure, it would be more work for them, but the people behind OGG Vorbis are keen on getting support, so I'm sure they would be more than happy to help. They already provide sample code, and may provide more than that, which means that Apple has a really easy job of adding the support.
It seems more likely that Apple would release, or someone will hack open, ways to add codec modules. I imagine that iPods already do codecs in a modular way, since it would make development a lot easier.
I might even buy one if I could play OGG and encode to Speex on the fly.
A lack of government research should actually open up doors for private research. I think this will take a lot longer than 10 years to repair. As the private research turns out product, they will make more money to fund more private research.
Not only will it take more than 10 years to repair, but it will also deprive many people of fantastic medicine. That medicine might be in the form of artificial limbs or repair of brain damage. It might be processes that will make an 80 year old body function like a 20 year old body. We might have all been dead before these things were discovered, but without help from the government there is little hope we'll be alive.
10 years? We might need to cross our fingers and hope that we walk away from this with a mindset where the government should be facilitating or even funding research.
When you don't evolutionary pressures (which we are working our best to get rid of) you're probably not going to get an entire population of evolution. Instead you will have a bell curve of any attribute where some fall significantly above and some fall significantly below the average. The below average will perhaps breed more, but they don't really matter as much as those above average.
What we are essentially going to do is widen the bell curve for any given trait (or combination of traits) and heighten it (since the population will go up). That means we will have a higher standard deviation, but our mean will probably remain around the same, unless some evoluationary pressure pushes us one direction or the other. Bell curves for all traits will widen, and extremes of almost any trait will limit breeding possibilities.
I've been thinking for years that it would be really convenient to have a USB or firewire 2GB RAM module.
Sure, it's slow as mold, but in Linux you could make it into a swap and set the priority to just greater than your disk swap, if you even have one. USB2.0 is in the range of 400mbits/second, right? 40 megs per second for a swap is reasonable.
At one point I was talking to my friend who is a USB developer about helping me put one together for fun or maybe profit. I figured it would be more functional to have an IDE or SCSI interface to a stack of DIMMs than USB in a production environment, but USB is still an option.
The prompting for this is that DIMMs are cheap, but my laptop maxes at 512mb. I sure would appreciate 8GB of RAM over USB so I could stop swapping when I have Firefox, Thunderbird, Open Office and decide to watch a movie!
I imagine most email harvisting software will ignore things like null@ and maybe things like nobody@ or abuse@ in addresses, figuring them to be false results.
A wise person could probably avoid 80% of spam just based on their username. A common username like john, will probably be getting spam before it is created, because spam software will take every reasonable domain name it can and add common names to it.
I have no idea what the format of the CDR media or filesystem is, but I can imagine that there's a bit somewhere at the beginning telling the CD what it is. I know there are about 4 data types and at least 1 audio type.
Call me a bastard, but I would pay the same amount for a data-only CD that donated part of the money to something like the EFF instead of taking it as a tax.
Someone could really bank on this, though, if it were possible. Even if it were possible to just not allow one of the bits to be set that would disallow audio recordings to the CD. As long as the data CD works to store data, preferably in a mode that allows multisession data.
In that case, it can only count as a data CD, and no music industry can argue that. Unless, of course, they start taxing per GB on hard disks, too.
Someone could really bank off this if they could get it to work. Call them Music Industry Free CDs.
-I back the statement about the To:, From: and CC: headers being cosmetic, in case people don't believe it.
It is easy to use false(or none at all) headers for those items and is well with in the protocol(i.e. not a hack).
Don't believe me? I'll send you a message addressed To: god@heaven.xxx.
Did they specify that these headers were the ones being opened and not the Received lines (which could be spoofed, but at least point one hop back from the last trusted host).
Are we talking about sniffing email in transit or taking it from inboxes? -If it's inboxes, then there is no way you can be certain of who sent it, so this is a moot point. -If we're talking in transit, then there's the possibility of forging and not collecting all the mail. -If we're talking outgoing, then you need to touch a machine on each path someone might send mail out through.
Logs provide the correct information, which is the envelope To address--not the header To/CC addresses.
Envelope From addresses can be faked, but if you need to log in to send mail it will likely include your account name.
Would an appropriate method have been for BMW to send off a friendly email to all the German websites that are results for the term BMW and ask that they use an actual link to the BMW site instead of just including the letters?
Is this really that different from manipulating results other ways? How different is it than if every instance of BMW on a German website were a link instead of just a term? Arguably, they should be links, shouldn't they? They make reference to a company and the reference should be a link, right?
Then there's the question of brand names. If I search for BMW, I should for damn sure have BMW at the top of the list.
I certainly don't mind, in fact I expect a search for BMW or the name of any vehicle BMW makes to have BMW in the top 10 search results. Why else would I be searching for BMW? If I searched for something like, "problems with BMW vehicles," I'd expect sites that deal with problems to be some of the top.
Now if I search for cars, I would expect websites that have to do with cars, but perhaps not specific vendors of cars, unless they were appropriate to the search. I mean, information on what a car even is, and how they work, and what types of cars there are.
Ironically, I don't want those two to overlap. I know they are terribly related. I don't want Jim's BMW Trash Talk Site to be the top result for BMW. Just the same, I don't want BMW at the top of my search for cars.
Would the appropriate method have been for BMW to send off a friendly email to all the German websites that are results for the term BMW and ask that they use an actual link to the BMW site instead of just including the letters? Is this any different from manipulating results other ways? How different is it than if every instance of BMW on a German website were a link instead of just a term? Arguably, they should be links, shouldn't they? They make reference to a company and the reference should be a link, right?
Okay, why is this guy targetting the stupid masses if his theory is so conclusive? That link is like reading an ad for something that may or may not work. It danced around any factuality. Used some current terms like "dark matter" and pointed people to either being a)like those who didn't believe the Earth was round or b)part of the growing masses that believe the stuff that he didn't really explain. Something akin to a religion, really.
Let me try to sum it up:
The world doesn't work the way everybody thinks. People on a large scale can be wrong, you know? Now, are you one of the "right" people or the "wrong" people? The principles of the way the world does work haven't been included, but make your decision!
I'm trying to imagine how they could do this technically. The only things I can imagine would be to use something that filtered streams and checked them for content (which would require some big-time processing) or proxy-style access to the internet. I am talking about a regular outgoing mail server and a proxy incoming mail server, then a proxy web server. That means that you couldn't use any protocols except the ones your ISP supported.
Talk about dark ages. The only way something like this would work is if they started selling this limited service at a small fraction of the cost of real service. Then they'd slowly phase out the real service. As soon as real service is gone, they would be free to up the cost.
This will make the internet useful for what the telcos say it's used for, only. This will open other doors, though. You will have small companies pop up that provide services locally. Instead of having to go through telco to email your friends in your city, you'll connect to the local service provider and email them free. Then the local service providers could connect to each other. It would also make (wireless) mesh networks a whole lot more desirable. Without a reasonable internet connection between the meshes, people can chip in and get a fast connection to the next town to join these mesh networks together.
In any case, telcos trying to do this kind of shit will be faced with incredible competition and even with income so large they might not be able to ride it out.
... all the way to his private jet to take a trip to one of his personal tropical islands where he has a satellite uplink that he can talk to any of his banks, either as client or owner.
I have no doubt in my mind that if things like this start to happen, Google will be quick to prevent it.
There are three ways the government could find out what people search for:
Google supplies it
Chinese government watches packets
Chinese government uses spyware on computers
The first case, I don't think Google would succumb. Google is a US presence and they will retreat behind the US military before becoming part of a situation like that.
The second case, Google would probably withdraw, but could fall back on network encryption (which probably wouldn't go over too well).
Third case, Google is pretty much helpless. The only option is to withdraw.
In any of these cases, though, if the Chinese government starts killing people over this, I think the US would intervene rather than suffer a WWII Germany times 100,000.
The China that we know and love can only go so far before the rest of the world comes down on it.
I don't buy it. Having access to the source will make it easier for the public to determine if someone has put MS code into a project (or vice versa) and it will come to light quickly.
Given that open source is already open and Microsoft is just now going to start providing it to specific groups, I'd say the open source author has a lot more ground to stand on, which may somewhat compensate for the unbalance of money.
In China, if Google doesn't comply, they will just be blocked. There is no court that can say that Google is right, and even if they could it wouldn't be heard.
In the US, the government has made a ridiculous request based on research data. Google is supposed to hand over data just because the government told them to, without any laws backing it. Let me tell you, Google better win this one.
I'm still way in Google's corner on all these issues. For Google to even be considered okay for China in the filtered state, I imagine that they must have some really smooth talking diplomats.
Probably more with all the overseas outsourcing. Perhaps I should say the perceived outsourcing, as it doesn't matter if it's real, or how much there is, but rather how much people feel like there is.
Someone mentioned windex, which is probably 60-70% alcohol and will not destroy your computer. Very little can grow in 70% alcohol, and probably nothing that would grow inside you.
Certainly would be silly to use antibacterial stuff on your keyboard, considering you could do better with a straight windex slaughter. Your fingers will re-contaminate the keyboard, which is good. The goal would be that your keyboard and hands would have a similar bacterial flora so that touching your keyboard or not touching it was about the same.
You don't have to worry about wiping out the bacteria on either your hands or keyboard unless you're using some really potent anti-bacterial agents.
i did not ch33t b4 on my hom3w3rk 4 classes in the CS 1 time! it wuz hard and i got D on prog cuz teacher doesnt like me. but i know comps like to hack on ur comp when ur not watching.
my jobz R ez 2!!!! i work 4 the univercity were i got my degree paper from. make network strong from haczors try 2 steal the data!
Slashdot Mirror
Sure, it would be more work for them, but the people behind OGG Vorbis are keen on getting support, so I'm sure they would be more than happy to help. They already provide sample code, and may provide more than that, which means that Apple has a really easy job of adding the support.
It seems more likely that Apple would release, or someone will hack open, ways to add codec modules. I imagine that iPods already do codecs in a modular way, since it would make development a lot easier.
I might even buy one if I could play OGG and encode to Speex on the fly.
It should have been...
Hint: say it
Several people have noted it, but I'm going to again.
This looks like way to pull server percentages toward Microsoft.
Think of the tens of thousands of domains that will be moving from an Apache/Linux server string to an IIS/Microsoft one.
Does it matter that they are, as people have been poking at, just domain name squatters? Not in the least!
When they do transition, expect Microsoft to really push at how they have more market share.
A lack of government research should actually open up doors for private research. I think this will take a lot longer than 10 years to repair. As the private research turns out product, they will make more money to fund more private research.
Not only will it take more than 10 years to repair, but it will also deprive many people of fantastic medicine. That medicine might be in the form of artificial limbs or repair of brain damage. It might be processes that will make an 80 year old body function like a 20 year old body. We might have all been dead before these things were discovered, but without help from the government there is little hope we'll be alive.
10 years? We might need to cross our fingers and hope that we walk away from this with a mindset where the government should be facilitating or even funding research.
When you don't evolutionary pressures (which we are working our best to get rid of) you're probably not going to get an entire population of evolution. Instead you will have a bell curve of any attribute where some fall significantly above and some fall significantly below the average. The below average will perhaps breed more, but they don't really matter as much as those above average.
What we are essentially going to do is widen the bell curve for any given trait (or combination of traits) and heighten it (since the population will go up). That means we will have a higher standard deviation, but our mean will probably remain around the same, unless some evoluationary pressure pushes us one direction or the other. Bell curves for all traits will widen, and extremes of almost any trait will limit breeding possibilities.
I've been thinking for years that it would be really convenient to have a USB or firewire 2GB RAM module.
Sure, it's slow as mold, but in Linux you could make it into a swap and set the priority to just greater than your disk swap, if you even have one. USB2.0 is in the range of 400mbits/second, right? 40 megs per second for a swap is reasonable.
At one point I was talking to my friend who is a USB developer about helping me put one together for fun or maybe profit. I figured it would be more functional to have an IDE or SCSI interface to a stack of DIMMs than USB in a production environment, but USB is still an option.
The prompting for this is that DIMMs are cheap, but my laptop maxes at 512mb. I sure would appreciate 8GB of RAM over USB so I could stop swapping when I have Firefox, Thunderbird, Open Office and decide to watch a movie!
I imagine most email harvisting software will ignore things like null@ and maybe things like nobody@ or abuse@ in addresses, figuring them to be false results.
A wise person could probably avoid 80% of spam just based on their username. A common username like john, will probably be getting spam before it is created, because spam software will take every reasonable domain name it can and add common names to it.
I have no idea what the format of the CDR media or filesystem is, but I can imagine that there's a bit somewhere at the beginning telling the CD what it is. I know there are about 4 data types and at least 1 audio type.
Call me a bastard, but I would pay the same amount for a data-only CD that donated part of the money to something like the EFF instead of taking it as a tax.
Someone could really bank on this, though, if it were possible. Even if it were possible to just not allow one of the bits to be set that would disallow audio recordings to the CD. As long as the data CD works to store data, preferably in a mode that allows multisession data.
In that case, it can only count as a data CD, and no music industry can argue that. Unless, of course, they start taxing per GB on hard disks, too.
Someone could really bank off this if they could get it to work. Call them Music Industry Free CDs.
Without reading the article:
-I back the statement about the To:, From: and CC: headers being cosmetic, in case people don't believe it.
It is easy to use false(or none at all) headers for those items and is well with in the protocol(i.e. not a hack).
Don't believe me? I'll send you a message addressed To: god@heaven.xxx.
Did they specify that these headers were the ones being opened and not the Received lines (which could be spoofed, but at least point one hop back from the last trusted host).
Are we talking about sniffing email in transit or taking it from inboxes?
-If it's inboxes, then there is no way you can be certain of who sent it, so this is a moot point.
-If we're talking in transit, then there's the possibility of forging and not collecting all the mail.
-If we're talking outgoing, then you need to touch a machine on each path someone might send mail out through.
Logs provide the correct information, which is the envelope To address--not the header To/CC addresses.
Envelope From addresses can be faked, but if you need to log in to send mail it will likely include your account name.
I really want to blow up the government because of all this monitoring stuff they are doing.
All who support: meet at 9PM on February 29th at the place you are thinking of right now.
Would an appropriate method have been for BMW to send off a friendly email to all the German websites that are results for the term BMW and ask that they use an actual link to the BMW site instead of just including the letters?
Is this really that different from manipulating results other ways? How different is it than if every instance of BMW on a German website were a link instead of just a term? Arguably, they should be links, shouldn't they? They make reference to a company and the reference should be a link, right?
Then there's the question of brand names. If I search for BMW, I should for damn sure have BMW at the top of the list.
I certainly don't mind, in fact I expect a search for BMW or the name of any vehicle BMW makes to have BMW in the top 10 search results. Why else would I be searching for BMW? If I searched for something like, "problems with BMW vehicles," I'd expect sites that deal with problems to be some of the top.
Now if I search for cars, I would expect websites that have to do with cars, but perhaps not specific vendors of cars, unless they were appropriate to the search. I mean, information on what a car even is, and how they work, and what types of cars there are.
Ironically, I don't want those two to overlap. I know they are terribly related. I don't want Jim's BMW Trash Talk Site to be the top result for BMW. Just the same, I don't want BMW at the top of my search for cars.
Would the appropriate method have been for BMW to send off a friendly email to all the German websites that are results for the term BMW and ask that they use an actual link to the BMW site instead of just including the letters? Is this any different from manipulating results other ways? How different is it than if every instance of BMW on a German website were a link instead of just a term? Arguably, they should be links, shouldn't they? They make reference to a company and the reference should be a link, right?
Okay, why is this guy targetting the stupid masses if his theory is so conclusive? That link is like reading an ad for something that may or may not work. It danced around any factuality. Used some current terms like "dark matter" and pointed people to either being a)like those who didn't believe the Earth was round or b)part of the growing masses that believe the stuff that he didn't really explain. Something akin to a religion, really.
Let me try to sum it up:
The world doesn't work the way everybody thinks. People on a large scale can be wrong, you know? Now, are you one of the "right" people or the "wrong" people? The principles of the way the world does work haven't been included, but make your decision!
I'm trying to imagine how they could do this technically. The only things I can imagine would be to use something that filtered streams and checked them for content (which would require some big-time processing) or proxy-style access to the internet. I am talking about a regular outgoing mail server and a proxy incoming mail server, then a proxy web server. That means that you couldn't use any protocols except the ones your ISP supported.
Talk about dark ages. The only way something like this would work is if they started selling this limited service at a small fraction of the cost of real service. Then they'd slowly phase out the real service. As soon as real service is gone, they would be free to up the cost.
This will make the internet useful for what the telcos say it's used for, only. This will open other doors, though. You will have small companies pop up that provide services locally. Instead of having to go through telco to email your friends in your city, you'll connect to the local service provider and email them free. Then the local service providers could connect to each other. It would also make (wireless) mesh networks a whole lot more desirable. Without a reasonable internet connection between the meshes, people can chip in and get a fast connection to the next town to join these mesh networks together.
In any case, telcos trying to do this kind of shit will be faced with incredible competition and even with income so large they might not be able to ride it out.
... all the way to his private jet to take a trip to one of his personal tropical islands where he has a satellite uplink that he can talk to any of his banks, either as client or owner.
I have no doubt in my mind that if things like this start to happen, Google will be quick to prevent it.
There are three ways the government could find out what people search for:
Google supplies it
Chinese government watches packets
Chinese government uses spyware on computers
The first case, I don't think Google would succumb. Google is a US presence and they will retreat behind the US military before becoming part of a situation like that.
The second case, Google would probably withdraw, but could fall back on network encryption (which probably wouldn't go over too well).
Third case, Google is pretty much helpless. The only option is to withdraw.
In any of these cases, though, if the Chinese government starts killing people over this, I think the US would intervene rather than suffer a WWII Germany times 100,000.
The China that we know and love can only go so far before the rest of the world comes down on it.
I don't buy it. Having access to the source will make it easier for the public to determine if someone has put MS code into a project (or vice versa) and it will come to light quickly.
Given that open source is already open and Microsoft is just now going to start providing it to specific groups, I'd say the open source author has a lot more ground to stand on, which may somewhat compensate for the unbalance of money.
In China, if Google doesn't comply, they will just be blocked. There is no court that can say that Google is right, and even if they could it wouldn't be heard.
In the US, the government has made a ridiculous request based on research data. Google is supposed to hand over data just because the government told them to, without any laws backing it. Let me tell you, Google better win this one.
I'm still way in Google's corner on all these issues. For Google to even be considered okay for China in the filtered state, I imagine that they must have some really smooth talking diplomats.
"Are you sure you want to execute NAKED BRITNEY.JPG.exe?"
YYYYEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSS!!!!!
Patriot Search sounds like it's a search for missiles.
They are surprisingly easy to compare: drugs and games (or even television)
It may not, but don't let that deter you from snapping RJ45 connectors on the end of some fiber optic cable and upgrading(tee hee) your home network.
Probably more with all the overseas outsourcing. Perhaps I should say the perceived outsourcing, as it doesn't matter if it's real, or how much there is, but rather how much people feel like there is.
Someone mentioned windex, which is probably 60-70% alcohol and will not destroy your computer. Very little can grow in 70% alcohol, and probably nothing that would grow inside you.
Certainly would be silly to use antibacterial stuff on your keyboard, considering you could do better with a straight windex slaughter. Your fingers will re-contaminate the keyboard, which is good. The goal would be that your keyboard and hands would have a similar bacterial flora so that touching your keyboard or not touching it was about the same.
You don't have to worry about wiping out the bacteria on either your hands or keyboard unless you're using some really potent anti-bacterial agents.
i did not ch33t b4 on my hom3w3rk 4 classes in the CS 1 time! it wuz hard and i got D on prog cuz teacher doesnt like me. but i know comps like to hack on ur comp when ur not watching.
my jobz R ez 2!!!! i work 4 the univercity were i got my degree paper from. make network strong from haczors try 2 steal the data!
w00t!