> > Ajax isn't a technology. It's really several technologies, each flourishing in its own right, coming together in powerful new ways.
> >It's like the marketing folks went plumb crazy generating this ad that was posted onto the slashdot front page.
Well, you see, by making everything in the ad a hyperlink, nobody can complain about our collective failure to RTFA. I mean, which clicky thingy in there was supposed to be TFA again? That " "--×oe" thing? 50 randomly spidered links on del.icio.us. (Oops, that's not random, it's the semantic web! It's cool because it's got an RSS feed!) It's disorganized writing, even by the unholy shocking standards of folks like us who read blogs and wikis!
Anyways, I hope someone gets to yell out BINGO! on "semantic web", "RSS", "blog" or "wiki". My card still has a few more holes to check off. I've done my part. Carry on.
> USA Today reports an appeals court was not amused at the FCC's broadcast flag rule. Sounds like the judge bought into the argument that the FCC does not have the authority to dictate device design. The broadcast flag isn't quite dead yet, but at least it's in trouble
It is official; USA Today now confirms: Broadcast flag is dying.
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered FCC when USA Today confirmed that broadcast flag market share has fallen yet again, now down to less than 50 percent of federal judges. Coming on the heels of a recent ruling which plainly states that the FCC has "crossed the line", this judgement serves to reinforce what we've known all along. The broadcast flag is sending the DRM industry into complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by bottoming out in the recent ruling from Judge Edwards.
You don't need to be Michael Powell to predict the broadcast flag's future. The hand writing is on the wall: the broadcast faces a long and tortuous future. In fact there won't be any future at all for the broadcast flag because the content industry is shrinking. Things are looking very bad for the content industry. As many of us are already aware, the content industry continues to lose market share. Red ink flows from Hollywood like a river of blood.
The broadcast flag is the most hated of them all, having been ruled against by at least one circuit court judge. The sudden and pleasant release of the long developed arguments in court only serves to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: the broadcast flag is dying.
Let's look at the numbe[BROADCAST FLAG INFRINGMENT DETECTED - REDISTRIBUTION OF A DERIVATIVE WORK OF NETCRAFT, INC - POSTER NEUTRALIZED]
> have tested mobile VOIP over Wi-Fi at over 130 Km/h over an 8km stretch of Interstate highway somewhere near the Mexican border. Gee... I wonder what this is for?
"DEY TUK R CONTENT!" - RIAA chair Cary Sherman
"Goddamn netbacks!" - MPAA chair Jack Valenti
"I! LOVE! THIS! COMPANY!" - Steve Ballmer, doing things you thought you could never get Americans to do for any price.
> Theatrics aside, the cost of quality cable or satellite programming has gone up, but the quality has been on a steady decline because of the loss of ad revenue. The FCC decision like most of their actions was made to preserve the standard of service that we've grown accustomed to, and one wonders if it will be worth recording if there is nothing at all to record.
I respectfully disagree.
The cost of delivering programming has dropped drastically, but the number of eyeballs on screens (and consequently, total advertising dollars) have remained relatively constant.
Furthermore, the ease of delivering content has meant that there are less advertising dollars available for any given hour of content.
The requirement that shareholders get a return on their investments has consequently to a need to reduce the cost of creating said programming.
We saw this when we went from a 3-channel (ABC, NBC, CBS) universe to a 50-channel (+47 channels of cable) universe. Mainstream "news" programming got the axe; why have a foreign bureau and an investigative team for 2 hours a night when you can do 15 minutes of soundbites, 15 minutes of sports, 15 minutes of weather, and 15 minutes of advertorials made to look like "human interest" or "your health" stories, freeing up the second hour per night for a couple of sitcoms?
Now that we're moving from a 50-channel universe (ABCBSNBCNNESPBSNFOXNickSciFiDiscovery and a whole bunch of other names you'll recognize) to a 500-channel universe ([thumbing through the "D"s... Discovery Homes. Discovery Queer Eye. Discovery Paranormal. Discovery Quadrupeds. Discovery Plants. Discovery Avians... [flipflip] Disney Ages 0-2...), we have the same problem again.
And we see the same result: Cut the cost of production, shifting to reality shows over stuff that requires expensive scriptwriters, content licenses, and/or (pen/ink/CGI) animators.
You'll get this result regardless of whether you have a PVR or not. You cannot watch more than 24 hours of TV (that is, 8 hours of advertisements) in a day. The value of an ad placed on Disney Nostalgia Channel Males Aged 30-49 is going to be less than "Behind the Wonderful World of Disney: Annette Funicello Does Disneyland" on ABC in a 3-channel universe.)
"OMG, they're TURKEYS!"
(God as my witness, I honestly thought turkeys could fly.)
The problem with the process, as I read the article, is that while thermal depolymerization may scale for any one particular type of waste, no single TD process works as well for all types of waste.
If you're already running a turkey plant, it may be economical to spend $1M to render down turkey guts into $1.1M worth of oil. (Spend time in phase 1 than in phase 2.)
If you're already running a tire dump, it may be economical to spend $1M for the same plant, with the dials set differently, to render used automobile tyres into $1.1M worth of oil. (Spend more time in phase 2 than phase 1.)
The problem is that the process isn't continuous and efficient for all input waste types, such that not worth spending $100M for a really big plant to render 3000 incoming truckloads of raw organic matter into $110M worth of oil, because you can't. You have to separate the truckloads of "stuff with carbon in it" into piles of cow/pig/turkey bones, human bits from hospitals, raw sewage, chickenshit, pigshit, spammer, plastic bottles, used tires, and run different processes to get the most valuable materials out of each of the three waste streams.
Neat idea for small and medium businesses with a uniform waste stream. Not gonna change the world.
> Instead of moving to Canada, get married and make hot monkey love with your wife. After your first child is born, you'll soon realize adult images permeate every aspect of our existence -- images unseen by casual existence just twenty years ago -- and you'll want to kill your TV.
OK, I did that.
After I made love to your wife, my wife got rather annoyed with me. And she really got pissed when I kept at it after our first child was born.
I ended up having to move to Canada, and I already knew there was pr0n on the internets before I started, so where, precisely, was the win here?
> Named the Sim Icarus Flight Deck, it accurately recreates the primary flight accessory controls of the Boeing 777, and interfaces directly with Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004. They have tons of pictures and lists of everything you need!
FDS Total =$1,479.00 PFC Total =$750.00 FL Total = $1,239.00 Hagstrom $190.00 Digikey/M$486.05 Home Depot = $390.80 Computer = $1,080.00 Software = $510.00 Brian Sign = $48.00 -- Total = $6,172.85
> > think Starbucks that bakes their own bread
>
So their bread is overpriced and burnt but served by attractive female bakers so you keep coming back?
Black, bitter, tied up in a burlap sack and hauled over the mountains on a donkey, available all day for $4.50. Or full of eggs, half-baked, glazed, and waiting for me in a basket.
> > violated Florida's wiretapping law - which states that it is criminal to 'intentionally intercept' any 'electronic communication.
> >hang on, doesnt the USA PATRIOT act allow the government to do exactly this? inspect your electronic communications? i'm no expert on US law, so somebody correct me if I'm wrong...
Well, yes. But the Patriot Act governs the relationship between government and taxpayer, not husband and wife. You're making a circular argument -- it's criminal to do things that the laws don't allow. Because the Patriot act is a law, whatever it permits is legal, by definition, at least until/unless the Supremes overturn the overreaching sections thereof.
To recap:
No matter how much you think citizens own the government, it's legal for the government to spy on its property (you).
Conversely, no matter how much you realize your wife owns you (her husband), it's still not legal for her to spy on her property.
> I don't get it. I guess I need to read the article. > >
A webserver needs port 80 and maybe 443 open. Any webserver can be secured.
A workstation doesn't even need that.
Not counting the (numerous) local exploits caused by IE, WMP, Outleak and other applications getting pwn3d by their handling of hostile content, the big (i.e. "remotely exploitable without user intervention") holes in Windows all stem from M$'s unstated design assumption that "all the world's an office LAN", and the open/listening status of ports 135, 445, 5000 (anyone remember uPnP, the first 2K/XP remote exploit?), UDP-1434 (SQL server) and the like.
If your business is based on selling an office application suite (and you're trying to extract a few more bucks from your office suite sales by requiring that someone buy your operating system to run it), then assuming that all the world's an office LAN is a pretty natural thing to do. It's wrong, it's flawed by design, and it's the canonical example of valuing ease of use over security, but it's pretty natural.
> Intel has just announced a breakthrough in laser technology
> allowing a continuous laser wave on a silicon chip. Apparently
> they devised a method to sap the interfering field of electrons
> previously generated in silicon by the lasers.
You know, I have one simple request, and that is to have silicon chips with frickin' laser beams on 'em.
Now, evidently, my electronically sapped colleague informs me
that that can't be done. Can you remind me what I pay you people
for? Honestly, throw me a frickin' bone here!
> Right now there are about 50 approved licenses; incompatible licenses confuse and impede developers and end users alike.
But that's what's so wonderful about standards. There are so many to choose from. Besides, if you really have a problem with a certain license, you should have the right to view, modifiy, and release your own license based on the work of those who've written licenses before you.
Join us now and share the licenses!
You'll be free, lawyers, you'll be free!
You'll be free, lawyers, you'll be free!
Lobbyists get piles of money,
That is true, lawyers, that is true.
But they cannot help their neighbors;
That's not good, lawyers, that's not good.
When we have enough licenses
At our call, lawyers, at our call,
We'll throw out that dirty li*cough*software,
Ever more, lawyers, ever more.
Sorry, RMS, I had to. The muse knows what it wants, even if it wants to give me a first-class ticket to hell with window seating.
> >... either you will no longer be able submit digital pictures and financial records as evidence of XYZ Corp.'s illegal... dealings or it can make it impossible for the RIAA/MPAA/DMCARCALSVPT to subpoena you...
> >
Yes, either one.
> Which do you think the lobbyists are pushing for?
Both of your arguments are based on a false dichotomy.
The correct answer is "both". You will be unable to submit digital pictures and financial records as evidence of XYZ Corp's illegal dealings, and simultaneously, it will remain possible for RIAA/MPAA/DMCARCALSVPT to sue you into the post-apocalypse with an ISP log that links an IP address associated with your account with a downloaded Britney Spears MP3.
> You used to be able to take for granted there were public news servers out there. This service was the best one, and only offered text groups, which was all I wanted anyway.
A full binary feed is about 1.2TB per day; not within the reach of the home user (Joe Sixpack), nor within the reach of the dedicated amateur (The top 1% of Joe Sixpacks who have a 19" rack in their closet) nor even the Really Generous Corporate Sponsor (Hi, OSDN! Thanks for Slashdot!).
A full feed of text groups, however, is probably only about 2 GB per day - a server that can provide 90-day retention of text groups is well within the (bandwidth and hardware cost) reach of the dedicated amateur who lays out $100-200 or so a month for his or her hobbies.
Because USENET is a store-and-forward network, and because bandwidth and hardware are getting increasingly cheap, there'll always be an open text server or two out there. Worst comes to worst (or is it best comes to best?), there may not be any one open text server that "everyone" uses, but a diffuse network of hundreds of 'em, one or two in every city.
>
If you ever go to an international domain name you such be looking out for scams anyway.
No, no, no. IDN's aren't about country codes, they're about special character codings that result in things in your status bar that look like their ASCII equivalent characters, but aren't.
Don't worry, that special site hosted in Christmas Island will continue to resolve just fine.:)
Slashdot Mirror
>
>NASA scientists market Martian microbes as 'Martian sea monkies'. Hilarity ensues.
Dehydrated martians? Yeah, I can work with that.
Audioedit: This bunny yelling " Run for the hills, folks! Or you'll be up to your armpits in Martians!"
K-9 wants steak?
> (1) Game Boy Advance ($70 for the regular kind, $80 for the SP)
> (1) Copy of Doom ($30)
Yeah, but will your GBA be able to run Linu-never mind, of course it will.
>
>It's like the marketing folks went plumb crazy generating this ad that was posted onto the slashdot front page.
Well, you see, by making everything in the ad a hyperlink, nobody can complain about our collective failure to RTFA. I mean, which clicky thingy in there was supposed to be TFA again? That " "--×oe" thing? 50 randomly spidered links on del.icio.us. (Oops, that's not random, it's the semantic web! It's cool because it's got an RSS feed!) It's disorganized writing, even by the unholy shocking standards of folks like us who read blogs and wikis!
Anyways, I hope someone gets to yell out BINGO! on "semantic web", "RSS", "blog" or "wiki". My card still has a few more holes to check off. I've done my part. Carry on.
It is official; USA Today now confirms: Broadcast flag is dying. One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered FCC when USA Today confirmed that broadcast flag market share has fallen yet again, now down to less than 50 percent of federal judges. Coming on the heels of a recent ruling which plainly states that the FCC has "crossed the line", this judgement serves to reinforce what we've known all along. The broadcast flag is sending the DRM industry into complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by bottoming out in the recent ruling from Judge Edwards.
You don't need to be Michael Powell to predict the broadcast flag's future. The hand writing is on the wall: the broadcast faces a long and tortuous future. In fact there won't be any future at all for the broadcast flag because the content industry is shrinking. Things are looking very bad for the content industry. As many of us are already aware, the content industry continues to lose market share. Red ink flows from Hollywood like a river of blood.
The broadcast flag is the most hated of them all, having been ruled against by at least one circuit court judge. The sudden and pleasant release of the long developed arguments in court only serves to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: the broadcast flag is dying.
Let's look at the numbe[BROADCAST FLAG INFRINGMENT DETECTED - REDISTRIBUTION OF A DERIVATIVE WORK OF NETCRAFT, INC - POSTER NEUTRALIZED]
>
> That's no galaxy, that's a space station!
Wrong movie. Both of ya stop it!
"My god! It's full of st... no, wait a minute"
- Arthur V. Fark, HI21: A Galactic Oddity
"DEY TUK R CONTENT!"
- RIAA chair Cary Sherman
"Goddamn netbacks!"
- MPAA chair Jack Valenti
"I! LOVE! THIS! COMPANY!"
- Steve Ballmer, doing things you thought you could never get Americans to do for any price.
I respectfully disagree.
The cost of delivering programming has dropped drastically, but the number of eyeballs on screens (and consequently, total advertising dollars) have remained relatively constant.
Furthermore, the ease of delivering content has meant that there are less advertising dollars available for any given hour of content.
The requirement that shareholders get a return on their investments has consequently to a need to reduce the cost of creating said programming.
We saw this when we went from a 3-channel (ABC, NBC, CBS) universe to a 50-channel (+47 channels of cable) universe. Mainstream "news" programming got the axe; why have a foreign bureau and an investigative team for 2 hours a night when you can do 15 minutes of soundbites, 15 minutes of sports, 15 minutes of weather, and 15 minutes of advertorials made to look like "human interest" or "your health" stories, freeing up the second hour per night for a couple of sitcoms?
Now that we're moving from a 50-channel universe (ABCBSNBCNNESPBSNFOXNickSciFiDiscovery and a whole bunch of other names you'll recognize) to a 500-channel universe ([thumbing through the "D"s... Discovery Homes. Discovery Queer Eye. Discovery Paranormal. Discovery Quadrupeds. Discovery Plants. Discovery Avians ... [flipflip] Disney Ages 0-2...), we have the same problem again.
And we see the same result: Cut the cost of production, shifting to reality shows over stuff that requires expensive scriptwriters, content licenses, and/or (pen/ink/CGI) animators.
You'll get this result regardless of whether you have a PVR or not. You cannot watch more than 24 hours of TV (that is, 8 hours of advertisements) in a day. The value of an ad placed on Disney Nostalgia Channel Males Aged 30-49 is going to be less than "Behind the Wonderful World of Disney: Annette Funicello Does Disneyland" on ABC in a 3-channel universe.)
(God as my witness, I honestly thought turkeys could fly.)
The problem with the process, as I read the article, is that while thermal depolymerization may scale for any one particular type of waste, no single TD process works as well for all types of waste.
If you're already running a turkey plant, it may be economical to spend $1M to render down turkey guts into $1.1M worth of oil. (Spend time in phase 1 than in phase 2.)
If you're already running a tire dump, it may be economical to spend $1M for the same plant, with the dials set differently, to render used automobile tyres into $1.1M worth of oil. (Spend more time in phase 2 than phase 1.)
The problem is that the process isn't continuous and efficient for all input waste types, such that not worth spending $100M for a really big plant to render 3000 incoming truckloads of raw organic matter into $110M worth of oil, because you can't. You have to separate the truckloads of "stuff with carbon in it" into piles of cow/pig/turkey bones, human bits from hospitals, raw sewage, chickenshit, pigshit, spammer, plastic bottles, used tires, and run different processes to get the most valuable materials out of each of the three waste streams.
Neat idea for small and medium businesses with a uniform waste stream. Not gonna change the world.
OK, I did that.
After I made love to your wife, my wife got rather annoyed with me. And she really got pissed when I kept at it after our first child was born.
I ended up having to move to Canada, and I already knew there was pr0n on the internets before I started, so where, precisely, was the win here?
> 99. swingline 747 stapler, 2002 filler characters
>[
>2. zenith space command tv remote control, 1956 filler characters
> 1. apple powerbook 100, 1991
0. filler characters, 2005, now available like your Apple Powerbook 100, without filler characters!
Can you pw*404*
Aaw crap. I guess he could.
Hey, just because it's Friday and some of us started drinking early doesn't mean we're responsible for global warming. Leave my cow orkers out of it!
FDS Total =$1,479.00
PFC Total =$750.00
FL Total = $1,239.00
Hagstrom $190.00
Digikey/M$486.05
Home Depot = $390.80
Computer = $1,080.00
Software = $510.00
Brian Sign = $48.00
--
Total = $6,172.85
Heatproof wax = $priceless.
> So their bread is overpriced and burnt but served by attractive female bakers so you keep coming back?
Black, bitter, tied up in a burlap sack and hauled over the mountains on a donkey, available all day for $4.50. Or full of eggs, half-baked, glazed, and waiting for me in a basket.
Pays your money, takes ya chances.
Legal or not, if he's plugging into a box that's running in promiscuous mode, he deserves what he gets.
>
>hang on, doesnt the USA PATRIOT act allow the government to do exactly this? inspect your electronic communications? i'm no expert on US law, so somebody correct me if I'm wrong...
Well, yes. But the Patriot Act governs the relationship between government and taxpayer, not husband and wife. You're making a circular argument -- it's criminal to do things that the laws don't allow. Because the Patriot act is a law, whatever it permits is legal, by definition, at least until/unless the Supremes overturn the overreaching sections thereof.
To recap:
No matter how much you think citizens own the government, it's legal for the government to spy on its property (you).
Conversely, no matter how much you realize your wife owns you (her husband), it's still not legal for her to spy on her property.
But either way, you're 0wn3d.
>
> A webserver needs port 80 and maybe 443 open. Any webserver can be secured.
A workstation doesn't even need that.
Not counting the (numerous) local exploits caused by IE, WMP, Outleak and other applications getting pwn3d by their handling of hostile content, the big (i.e. "remotely exploitable without user intervention") holes in Windows all stem from M$'s unstated design assumption that "all the world's an office LAN", and the open/listening status of ports 135, 445, 5000 (anyone remember uPnP, the first 2K/XP remote exploit?), UDP-1434 (SQL server) and the like.
If your business is based on selling an office application suite (and you're trying to extract a few more bucks from your office suite sales by requiring that someone buy your operating system to run it), then assuming that all the world's an office LAN is a pretty natural thing to do. It's wrong, it's flawed by design, and it's the canonical example of valuing ease of use over security, but it's pretty natural.
> allowing a continuous laser wave on a silicon chip. Apparently
> they devised a method to sap the interfering field of electrons
> previously generated in silicon by the lasers.
You know, I have one simple request, and that is to have silicon chips with frickin' laser beams on 'em. Now, evidently, my electronically sapped colleague informs me that that can't be done. Can you remind me what I pay you people for? Honestly, throw me a frickin' bone here!
But that's what's so wonderful about standards. There are so many to choose from. Besides, if you really have a problem with a certain license, you should have the right to view, modifiy, and release your own license based on the work of those who've written licenses before you.
Sorry, RMS, I had to. The muse knows what it wants, even if it wants to give me a first-class ticket to hell with window seating.
Creature that secrete methane gas and spend their lives hidden in caves, never coming out for observation.
Well, of course, th-HEY! This isn't the "EULA Confusion w/ Used Copies of WoW?" thread!
>
> Yes, either one.
> Which do you think the lobbyists are pushing for?
Both of your arguments are based on a false dichotomy.
The correct answer is "both". You will be unable to submit digital pictures and financial records as evidence of XYZ Corp's illegal dealings, and simultaneously, it will remain possible for RIAA/MPAA/DMCARCALSVPT to sue you into the post-apocalypse with an ISP log that links an IP address associated with your account with a downloaded Britney Spears MP3.
> "Stop repeating everything I'm saying!"
> "Stallman's a dork."
> "Stallman's a... HEY!"
*pause*
"Stallman's a GNU/dork?"
> "Stallman Feeds Gates His Own Words"
"Don't worry, nobody will ever nee*gakfmfmmmmp6wtf40phrghhshs*hare the Software! You'll be Free, Hackers! You'll be Free!"
> "Now, if only Bill were as clear-minded on the subjects of Innovation and Interoperability."
No thanks. I think I've already given up eating for today.
A full binary feed is about 1.2TB per day; not within the reach of the home user (Joe Sixpack), nor within the reach of the dedicated amateur (The top 1% of Joe Sixpacks who have a 19" rack in their closet) nor even the Really Generous Corporate Sponsor (Hi, OSDN! Thanks for Slashdot!).
A full feed of text groups, however, is probably only about 2 GB per day - a server that can provide 90-day retention of text groups is well within the (bandwidth and hardware cost) reach of the dedicated amateur who lays out $100-200 or so a month for his or her hobbies.
Because USENET is a store-and-forward network, and because bandwidth and hardware are getting increasingly cheap, there'll always be an open text server or two out there. Worst comes to worst (or is it best comes to best?), there may not be any one open text server that "everyone" uses, but a diffuse network of hundreds of 'em, one or two in every city.
No, no, no. IDN's aren't about country codes, they're about special character codings that result in things in your status bar that look like their ASCII equivalent characters, but aren't.
Don't worry, that special site hosted in Christmas Island will continue to resolve just fine. :)