Have you tried OpenOffice.org? It comes with a really nice equation editor built into oowriter (their version of Word). Also, calc (their version of Excel) is compatable with all versions of Excel.
It's nice to see the FBI arresting the person actually breaking the law, unlike the RIAA which suied napster and other P2P services for "providing a conduit to break the law." If the FBI thought like the RIAA, they would destroy all roads in the US, because they facilitate people breaking the speed limit.
This may be redundant, but when I followed the link in the NYT article, I could not find said digital camera anywhere on Ritz's site. Givin NYT's sorted past, I wonder if the article is legit.
Well, they could always force people to use the Opera browser. It will pop up a box for every cookie displaying the contents and asking if you want to allow the cookie or not. Come to think of it, Opera is headquartered in Norway, maybe there's a connection?
I know we've all heard a lot of these buzz words floating around.
In fact, cetain "intellectual property" copyright holders like to muddy the watters here, so can you explain the difference between infringing someone's "intellectual property" rights and fair use? For example, why wouldn't I go to jail for taping a song on the radio and playing it in my car, but now I cannot copy a CD that I buy and listen to it at home and at work?
Once you burn it to cd couldn't you just rip it and re-encode it again? If the watermark is embedded within the audio itself then there would have to be a "magical" bitrate where encoding would distort it enough to render it useless. Since we can't percieve the watermarking anyways that bitrate should be fairly high leaving plenty of quality left for unwatermarked audio listening goodness. This seems like an easy solution to me, but perhaps they made their watermark resilient enough to withstand re-encoding.
I'm assuming that they are using an mp3 type encoding, but not mp3 itself. I'm also assuming that they are using a relitively low bitrate as compaired to CD Audio, since you have to download the music. This means that when you burn to a CD, you keep the watermark in tact. In fact, in order to degrade the watermark, you'll have to degrade your music. Most people won't download an mp3 unless it's at least 128Kbps, so if they encode the files at that rate, they figure they won't have to worry about too many people sharing them. The watermark would survive multiple encodings, as long as the encoding never went below the rate at which the original file was encoded. You could possibly get around this by using a variable bit rate codec like ogg, but I think the main purpose of the watermark is to ensure that your don't re-encode the file at the same or greater bitrate and share it using a p2p program. I would consider it very basic protection.
I'd be interested to know how anybody could tell if you've shared the music and what this 'digital watermarking' is all about.
I'm fairly certain that he isreferring to sharing mp3s on the Internet. If UMG finds their songs on the Internet, then they just have to look at the watermark (unique white noise that is inserted in the file) to see who they need to arrest/sue.
I know it's not supposed to be CDROM based, but it is smaller and easier. They've stopped developement on it, so it's pretty stable. You can hack it to run off a CDROM, but it's just as good from a floppy. It's part of the Linux Router Project, and it acts as a pretty good firewall too. It uses IP chains and IP masquerade, so you can do as much or as little configuration as you want.
I tried sending an e-mail to my Senator and I got an auto-reply saying I needed to use his webform. I sent an e-mail to another Senator and did not get the auto-reply. I guess it's hit and miss.
I sent e-mails Tom Daschle and Tim Hutchinson using Galeon and it worked fine. I think that each Senator is responcible for his own website, so maybe whoever designed that particular site didn't know what they were doing.
My old Company didn't have a limit, one day some non-tech person from a branch accross the country sent everyone in the office a 40 meg powerpoint. It didn't really contain any information that couldn't have been put in a secure intranet.
Even on a T1 it took as all some time to download it (there were about 15 people all getting it at the same time).
In retrospect, I think 5 meg would have been a good limit (but that should depend on what your bandwidth is) if nothing else, just to protect the servers. If someone needs to send/receive a larger file, then speccial arrangements can be made.
Capitalism is a short-sighted system that puts profits before people, dollars before the environment.
If you want to see some "short-sighted" forms of government, read the history of Communisn and Fascism, or beter yet look them up on dictionary.com.
I would hardly call Capitalism "short-sighted" when it has been around in some form or another since the dawn of time.
As far as evile is conserned, remember Hitler who killed people senselessly? How about Stalin, who killed more people in his purges than Hitler? Surely even you would admit that Communism and Fascism are the evile "systems".
I gladly take Capitalism and if you are dissatasfied with our government, why don't you defect to China, North Korea, North Vietnam, Iraq, or Cuba? What? They are all dirt poor and you couldn't afford any of the "necessities" that you enjoy now? Oh, maybe Capitalism isn't so that bad after all.
The average person, doing average things, should NOT have to worry about the secret police knocking at their door at 2 in the morning, or getting arrested for doing the same thing that everybody does every day.
I never liked the "everyone else is doing it" agument for one simple reason. If everyone else is doing it then they are equally as guilty, but that doesn't make you any less guilty. Until the people speak and their representitives change the laws, they are still the laws, and we are still subject to prosocution for not obeying them.
Just because you can break the law once and not get cought, doesn't mean you should expect to get away with it every time. It is simplistic to say that because we don't get cought every time we break a law, then the law wasn't meant to be followed. All not getting cought proves is that there wasn't someone there to catch us.
I personally dislike sellective prosocution because it can be missused to attack certain people or groups of people. The only way to stop selective prosocution is to either follow everyone and punish them as soon as they break a law or abolish all laws. Those sounds like even less appealing options.
If the laws were meant to be broken, then why were they passed? If they are too strict, then they should be laxed.
Who is to decide which laws were meant to be obeyed and which laws were meant to be broken? Should we each deside for ourselves? What if we disagree? And if laws can be broken without consequence, why do we have them?
When you have a system where laws are enfoced by selective prosecution you can't complain when they selectively prosecute you for breaking a law. If you break a law, you are opening the possibility of prosecution. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.
They use navigation systems to track bank robbers...
Personally, I'm glad to see them using On * to get that money back. I'd be really mad if someone got away with all that money when they could have been caught.
We need to distinguish between tracking someone who is breaking the law and someone who isn't. If you are breaking the law, then you have no rights.
Technically, we wouldn't have to move the wondow to a new desktop as long as we can display a picture of it. Chris Tyler is on the right track when he mentioned VNC because they do the exact same thing that you are saying is impossible. We would just need to scale it down to a single window instead of the desktop. There are X programs that will take a screenshot of a window instead of the whole screen, why can't we apply something like that to this situation. Great inventors have always forged on when others said it was "Mathematically impossible" (The Wright Brothers for example). Remember, there are no stupid questions only stupid answers
I use linuxwebhost.com They are only like $7-10 a month and they have all the fancy usage logs built in, plus they let you run just about any script you want.
One question...
What happens when two people who come from different networks but both use the same subnet (i.e. the basically default 192.168.0.x) show up and have the same IP address? The only way I could see this working is if you had each uplink switched and you routed based off of MAC address.
I don't have the networking know-how to do it yet, but I'm positive it can be done.
When I was in school, I used Turbo C++. The reference books from borland that came with the compiler (there were about 6 or 7 different books 2 of which were dedicated to the Windows API) were all I needed. When I moved on to C++ Builder I found that the help files that were installed with it had all the info I needed to program in Windows and Open GL.
Slashdot Mirror
sudo apt-get install mythtv; ...not THAT hard...
sudo apt-get upgrade;
Have you tried OpenOffice.org? It comes with a really nice equation editor built into oowriter (their version of Word). Also, calc (their version of Excel) is compatable with all versions of Excel.
It's nice to see the FBI arresting the person actually breaking the law, unlike the RIAA which suied napster and other P2P services for "providing a conduit to break the law." If the FBI thought like the RIAA, they would destroy all roads in the US, because they facilitate people breaking the speed limit.
This may be redundant, but when I followed the link in the NYT article, I could not find said digital camera anywhere on Ritz's site. Givin NYT's sorted past, I wonder if the article is legit.
Well, they could always force people to use the Opera browser. It will pop up a box for every cookie displaying the contents and asking if you want to allow the cookie or not. Come to think of it, Opera is headquartered in Norway, maybe there's a connection?
In fact, cetain "intellectual property" copyright holders like to muddy the watters here, so can you explain the difference between infringing someone's "intellectual property" rights and fair use?
For example, why wouldn't I go to jail for taping a song on the radio and playing it in my car, but now I cannot copy a CD that I buy and listen to it at home and at work?
Did the DMCA change my fair use rights?
I'm assuming that they are using an mp3 type encoding, but not mp3 itself. I'm also assuming that they are using a relitively low bitrate as compaired to CD Audio, since you have to download the music. This means that when you burn to a CD, you keep the watermark in tact. In fact, in order to degrade the watermark, you'll have to degrade your music. Most people won't download an mp3 unless it's at least 128Kbps, so if they encode the files at that rate, they figure they won't have to worry about too many people sharing them. The watermark would survive multiple encodings, as long as the encoding never went below the rate at which the original file was encoded. You could possibly get around this by using a variable bit rate codec like ogg, but I think the main purpose of the watermark is to ensure that your don't re-encode the file at the same or greater bitrate and share it using a p2p program. I would consider it very basic protection.
Of course this is all congecture.
I'm fairly certain that he isreferring to sharing mp3s on the Internet. If UMG finds their songs on the Internet, then they just have to look at the watermark (unique white noise that is inserted in the file) to see who they need to arrest/sue.
Coyote Linux!
I know it's not supposed to be CDROM based, but it is smaller and easier. They've stopped developement on it, so it's pretty stable. You can hack it to run off a CDROM, but it's just as good from a floppy. It's part of the Linux Router Project, and it acts as a pretty good firewall too. It uses IP chains and IP masquerade, so you can do as much or as little configuration as you want.
I tried sending an e-mail to my Senator and I got an auto-reply saying I needed to use his webform. I sent an e-mail to another Senator and did not get the auto-reply. I guess it's hit and miss.
I sent e-mails Tom Daschle and Tim Hutchinson using Galeon and it worked fine. I think that each Senator is responcible for his own website, so maybe whoever designed that particular site didn't know what they were doing.
My old Company didn't have a limit, one day some non-tech person from a branch accross the country sent everyone in the office a 40 meg powerpoint. It didn't really contain any information that couldn't have been put in a secure intranet.
Even on a T1 it took as all some time to download it (there were about 15 people all getting it at the same time).
In retrospect, I think 5 meg would have been a good limit (but that should depend on what your bandwidth is) if nothing else, just to protect the servers. If someone needs to send/receive a larger file, then speccial arrangements can be made.
Capitalism is a short-sighted system that puts profits before people, dollars before the environment.
If you want to see some "short-sighted" forms of government, read the history of Communisn and Fascism, or beter yet look them up on dictionary.com.
I would hardly call Capitalism "short-sighted" when it has been around in some form or another since the dawn of time.
As far as evile is conserned, remember Hitler who killed people senselessly? How about Stalin, who killed more people in his purges than Hitler? Surely even you would admit that Communism and Fascism are the evile "systems".
I gladly take Capitalism and if you are dissatasfied with our government, why don't you defect to China, North Korea, North Vietnam, Iraq, or Cuba? What? They are all dirt poor and you couldn't afford any of the "necessities" that you enjoy now? Oh, maybe Capitalism isn't so that bad after all.
I never liked the "everyone else is doing it" agument for one simple reason. If everyone else is doing it then they are equally as guilty, but that doesn't make you any less guilty. Until the people speak and their representitives change the laws, they are still the laws, and we are still subject to prosocution for not obeying them.
Just because you can break the law once and not get cought, doesn't mean you should expect to get away with it every time. It is simplistic to say that because we don't get cought every time we break a law, then the law wasn't meant to be followed. All not getting cought proves is that there wasn't someone there to catch us.
I personally dislike sellective prosocution because it can be missused to attack certain people or groups of people. The only way to stop selective prosocution is to either follow everyone and punish them as soon as they break a law or abolish all laws. Those sounds like even less appealing options.
Who is to decide which laws were meant to be obeyed and which laws were meant to be broken? Should we each deside for ourselves? What if we disagree? And if laws can be broken without consequence, why do we have them?
When you have a system where laws are enfoced by selective prosecution you can't complain when they selectively prosecute you for breaking a law. If you break a law, you are opening the possibility of prosecution. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.
Personally, I'm glad to see them using On * to get that money back. I'd be really mad if someone got away with all that money when they could have been caught.
We need to distinguish between tracking someone who is breaking the law and someone who isn't. If you are breaking the law, then you have no rights.
Technically, we wouldn't have to move the wondow to a new desktop as long as we can display a picture of it. Chris Tyler is on the right track when he mentioned VNC because they do the exact same thing that you are saying is impossible. We would just need to scale it down to a single window instead of the desktop.
There are X programs that will take a screenshot of a window instead of the whole screen, why can't we apply something like that to this situation.
Great inventors have always forged on when others said it was "Mathematically impossible" (The Wright Brothers for example). Remember, there are no stupid questions only stupid answers
I use linuxwebhost.com They are only like $7-10 a month and they have all the fancy usage logs built in, plus they let you run just about any script you want.
One question...
What happens when two people who come from different networks but both use the same subnet (i.e. the basically default 192.168.0.x) show up and have the same IP address? The only way I could see this working is if you had each uplink switched and you routed based off of MAC address.
I don't have the networking know-how to do it yet, but I'm positive it can be done.
I'm a little out of my element, but aren't they just firewire harddrives? Shouldn't you be able to mount them and read/write to them as such?
When I was in school, I used Turbo C++. The reference books from borland that came with the compiler (there were about 6 or 7 different books 2 of which were dedicated to the Windows API) were all I needed. When I moved on to C++ Builder I found that the help files that were installed with it had all the info I needed to program in Windows and Open GL.