The same thing strikes me when pedantics here on slashdot start throwing fits over the difference between GB and GiB.
Gibibyte, Mebibyte, Kibibyte, Tebibyte. Horrible, horrible words that make you sound like you're mumbling, and they look ridiculous in print as well. I think the problem stems from that they go i -> i and e -> i coupled with extra 'b's whereas the SI prefixes go i -> a, e -> a, and i -> o.
What are you smoking? Or rather, are you someone arguing a point without a clue.
I wonder how all those security researchers feel after destroying a legitimate commercial enterprise and affecting a lot of people who weren't spammers.
Whether they had any legit customers is suspect. If they did, I'm sure they would have come to light very quickly.
Will my internet connection go down because someone uses my ISP for spam?
No, your ISP will be notified about spam originating from its networks and they'll either deal with the user who is undoubtedly violating their TOS or the ISP's IP range will be entered into mail blackhole lists. Nothing new there.
If my computer becomes infected with malware, how long before I have 'researchers' digging through my private data?
Unlikely, and sadly you probably won't get punted off the net like you should. Instead, your computer will continue to be abused for the purposes of these criminals.
Your efforts to compare this to the drug war are completely irrational, as their causes and symptoms are wildly different. On top of that, there was no government involvement here.
Yes, I was surprised that people had to jailbreak it. I thought that you could somehow grab apps from websites and install them.
Technically you can, so long as it's a Java app that runs in the Android VM. Native app, or some ruby/perl/python script that runs in the shell? Time to jailbreak.
Same thing as the iPhone. You're either in the sandbox or you jailbreak.
GP was right, why the hell are you dragging guns into this.
Maybe as with cars and guns, one could get a nominal/test license to practice that hobby.
Fuck that. You don't need a license to own a car or gun. The only reason you need a license is to drive on public roads. The only reason you need a permit for guns is concealed carry.
What is it with morons like you that think we should have to ask the government's permission to do anything?
And if it's anything like their Quadro line to date, the difference between it and a standard gaming card is a couple BIOS settings and the driver setup.
I thought half the draw of the Eee PC wasn't just the price but the size. Why are they going closer and closer to the size of regular laptops and away from the 8" size?
If they had released a 7" model without the huge bezel around the scree I might have picked one up. Looks like I'll be looking to one of their competitors.
Potentially. But considering Android is designed to take advantage of 3G networks, I don't think the experience would be too snappy. I don't see Google Maps, much less Street View, working all that great on the A1200.
Sadly, getting custom kernels running on newer hardware is going to be more difficult. Pushing the software stack to Google lets them focus on making phones more and more end-user hostile (go go top-to-bottom checksums and code signing.)
Google will be cheered or booed depending on what they do with their changes to OpenID. They could very well turn around and propose it for version two or whatnot of OpenID. After all, if it isn't compatible then what the hell is the point.
Microsoft is hated because they DEFINED "embrace and extend." They regularly use it as a weapon against their competitors. We have yet to see Google use their version of OpenID, much less use it against anyone.
Never mind that OpenID screams "single point of failure" to me.
Mostly because the rest of the world suffers at the hand of the Federal Government. Were the states to actually act and reign it in, then they might be aware of the 50 governments that make up the Union.
Ah yes, so if millions demand that some category of people X be killed, they should be. And if they pass a law to make it so then it is RIGHT and JUST and GOOD.
Bull.
Sure, they have the right to choose the law of their land. And this shows that they are wholly incompetent and have no respect for the rights of others. Is it totalitarian to think that each person should be able to live their lives without undue interference from others and being prosecuted for bullshit reasoning, ESPECIALLY when that bullshit is religion?
1) You aren't challenging the majority's opinion. You're deciding that your opinion is correct and acting on it. 2) In acting on your opinion, you interfere unjustly with whomever's stuff you've decided to take.
He was accused of challenging an idea and sentenced to death for it. Yet challenging an idea confers no harm on others. Imposing ones religious beliefs and executing those who question them DOES confer harm. As does your taking of others' property.
While Linux is huge, for a backdoor to be successful it would need to hit a huge number of systems. The majority of the kernel at this point tends to be drivers, not all of which are used in a given kernel.
For it to be even remotely worthwhile, it'd have to be placed into something that was both heavily used AND given little attention. These two positions are almost mutually exclusive.
Can anyone think of a place that would fall into these two categories? Even the more seemingly obscure parts of the kernel get attention fairly often and malicious changes wouldn't go unnoticed for long.
They are instead paying attention to the artists. Can you see the difference?
It's likely that there's no difference. Even if it were the artists distributing directly, they'd probably screw them over just the same.
Most of the time, at least in my experience, there's no concept of "taking a stand" that drives it. It's all about "why pay when I can get it for free? You bought it? What a moron!" that drives this.
And the Red Hot Chili Peppers shouldn't give their music away for free either
That's not related at all to Stephen King's attempt. He tried doing the suggested pay-by-chapter method where readers could optionally pay if they liked it, and it ended up being a waste of his time. I don't know if he bothered to wrap the novel up and publish it the regular way or just gave up on it.
And I never said they shouldn't give their music away for free, that's entirely -their- call. My issue is with the OPs suggestion that they repudiate their copyright, which is needless self-punishment that opens the door for someone else to make use of it without ever acknowledging the source (thus defeating the point of said "promotion" entirely.)
For people who are already extremely successful in the traditional methods, they're not going to see the same amount of money using this new technique.
On the contrary, they are the only ones who will likely see any sort of success from it as the hard part, promotion, is already paid for. Everyone knows who Radiohead is, so people flocked in server crushing numbers to their website for their new album. However for new artists like the one you linked, it'll give him goodwill among small circles but it doesn't have nearly the punch as getting on the radio (another jar of worms) or your music on some movie soundtrack (which is what the giant labels do.)
And again, releasing one's music has nothing to do with OPs suggestion of releasing without copyright. Said movie studio will just have some famous name cover your song and leave you out to dry.
I see you're falling into the trench of "I have it figured out for $medium, therefore copyright is moot." Unfortunately, not everything falls under those banners.
For items that are costlier to create (TV shows, movies), product placement is a fine way to profit from the distribution of the product.
And what about movies or TV shows where such product placement would be horribly out of place? A medieval movie with GM/GE/Pepsi placements? Hell even my favorite hobby, anime, was getting into it with Code Geass, which was packed FULL of Pizza Hut ads which were distracting and ended up being the butt of jokes there were so many.
Subscriptions also can work, just like a chapter-by-chapter written blook that continues as people fund the author's writing.
I recall Stephen King trying this and giving up.
Those who hold onto the statist idea of intellectual property will be left behind.
Or they'll give up, when they find that they can't recoup the costs of production, much less make a profit.
They'll find their market swamped by amateurs with the same amount of talent, and with more drive to distribute their creations as artists always have.
You can't eat drive and talent (well you can, but it's considered anti-social...) I don't see people making entire movies and TV series that they just toss up on the internet unless they've got some greater source of funding to ensure they won't go broke in the process.
To support it, there are always ways to create value added items (t-shirts, in-person signings or shows, etc).
Which is pointless, since if you repudiate the copyright on your works (ALL of your works) then someone else might as well hang at your shows and sell knockoffs of what you're selling. And signings have limited effectiveness beyond single authors/bands, I'd like to see how you would fund the creation of an entire TV series with that.
Copyright is a very effective tool to allow for the creation of easily duplicated works without sticking it to the creators and essentially punishing them for making the investment. It needs to be reworked and it needs respect. However, the internet audience is extremely insular, rude, and just as selfish and greedy as the MPAA/RIAA (and member companies) when it comes to these things.
It won't take much for them to take a beautiful open source, extensible, customizable operating system and ship their phones with a custom locked down, provider locked, limited use piece of crap.
They already do this.
There's currently an effort to see what progress can be made with the Motorola A1600/A1800 MING 2s, but as they're finding the CPU:
- CRCs the bootloader which - CRCs the kernel / checks the kernel signature which - Uses SELinux to confirm the security of the read-only filesystems.
Sure they can boot a kernel after transferring it via USB, but there's no way they're going to be writing a custom kernel or filesystem to the flash and getting it to boot without convincing Motorola to sell versions of the phone with no bootloader CRC check.
there should be a clause in their license stating that no one can install (for resale) a version of this os with restrictions added.
It's called an anti-Tivoization clause and was added to the GPLv3, which incidentally does not apply to the Linux kernel. Efforts like the LiMo foundation are focused on implementing a user-space that is completely non-GPL to avoid the issue. Getting that source code requires you be a member of the foundation, which is $10k anuually for vendors and $100k annually for handset manufacturers.
Yes they want to take advantage of your hard work. No they don't want to give back to you. They do the bare minimum that they can to stay legal and will return to the community a kernel that boots, but does not fully support the hardware it drives (go go closed source kernel modules.)
OpenMoko is about the software, not the hardware. It can't be because the Freerunner is light years behind the G1 and every other smartphone out there. There have been efforts to port it to other hardware, but generally doing so is difficult because of the mobile arena being a very end-user hostile environment.
OpenMoko and Android are mutually exclusive, unless you really have a thing for getting your phone to dual-boot operating systems.
Slashdot Mirror
The same thing strikes me when pedantics here on slashdot start throwing fits over the difference between GB and GiB.
Gibibyte, Mebibyte, Kibibyte, Tebibyte. Horrible, horrible words that make you sound like you're mumbling, and they look ridiculous in print as well. I think the problem stems from that they go i -> i and e -> i coupled with extra 'b's whereas the SI prefixes go i -> a, e -> a, and i -> o.
What makes you think that they'd see a large transfer and instantly go "OMG HE'S DOWNLOADING A MOVIE"?
They've done stupid shit before but c'mon, that's ridiculous. Unless you seriously believe they sit on Linux torrents and C&D the people on them.
What are you smoking? Or rather, are you someone arguing a point without a clue.
Whether they had any legit customers is suspect. If they did, I'm sure they would have come to light very quickly.
No, your ISP will be notified about spam originating from its networks and they'll either deal with the user who is undoubtedly violating their TOS or the ISP's IP range will be entered into mail blackhole lists. Nothing new there.
Unlikely, and sadly you probably won't get punted off the net like you should. Instead, your computer will continue to be abused for the purposes of these criminals.
Your efforts to compare this to the drug war are completely irrational, as their causes and symptoms are wildly different. On top of that, there was no government involvement here.
Technically you can, so long as it's a Java app that runs in the Android VM. Native app, or some ruby/perl/python script that runs in the shell? Time to jailbreak.
Same thing as the iPhone. You're either in the sandbox or you jailbreak.
Well sure, within the context of running applications in a Java sandbox and doing things in emulators.
Once you bring in carriers into the mix, "open" goes out the window because it gives people the ability to step around your nickel and diming.
GP was right, why the hell are you dragging guns into this.
Fuck that. You don't need a license to own a car or gun. The only reason you need a license is to drive on public roads. The only reason you need a permit for guns is concealed carry.
What is it with morons like you that think we should have to ask the government's permission to do anything?
And if it's anything like their Quadro line to date, the difference between it and a standard gaming card is a couple BIOS settings and the driver setup.
The thought of performing silly motions over and over again, or their name.
YES, it went RIGHT OVER MY HEAD.
I hesitate to read the sole response, for I certainly deserve it.
Subscription required?
What on earth are you ranting about, the site is someone's personal blog!
I thought half the draw of the Eee PC wasn't just the price but the size. Why are they going closer and closer to the size of regular laptops and away from the 8" size?
If they had released a 7" model without the huge bezel around the scree I might have picked one up. Looks like I'll be looking to one of their competitors.
Potentially. But considering Android is designed to take advantage of 3G networks, I don't think the experience would be too snappy. I don't see Google Maps, much less Street View, working all that great on the A1200.
Sadly, getting custom kernels running on newer hardware is going to be more difficult. Pushing the software stack to Google lets them focus on making phones more and more end-user hostile (go go top-to-bottom checksums and code signing.)
Google will be cheered or booed depending on what they do with their changes to OpenID. They could very well turn around and propose it for version two or whatnot of OpenID. After all, if it isn't compatible then what the hell is the point.
Microsoft is hated because they DEFINED "embrace and extend." They regularly use it as a weapon against their competitors. We have yet to see Google use their version of OpenID, much less use it against anyone.
Never mind that OpenID screams "single point of failure" to me.
Cause there's nothing quite like jacking the work of others, right?
http://forums.fark.com/cgi/fark/comments.pl?IDLink=3975103&IDComment=45754482#c45754482
You owe Decados an apology!
This is a product of the anti-Apple hate machine, not the Apple hype machine.
Mostly because the rest of the world suffers at the hand of the Federal Government. Were the states to actually act and reign it in, then they might be aware of the 50 governments that make up the Union.
Ah yes, so if millions demand that some category of people X be killed, they should be. And if they pass a law to make it so then it is RIGHT and JUST and GOOD.
Bull.
Sure, they have the right to choose the law of their land. And this shows that they are wholly incompetent and have no respect for the rights of others. Is it totalitarian to think that each person should be able to live their lives without undue interference from others and being prosecuted for bullshit reasoning, ESPECIALLY when that bullshit is religion?
Your statement is, as the topic, absurd.
1) You aren't challenging the majority's opinion. You're deciding that your opinion is correct and acting on it.
2) In acting on your opinion, you interfere unjustly with whomever's stuff you've decided to take.
He was accused of challenging an idea and sentenced to death for it. Yet challenging an idea confers no harm on others. Imposing ones religious beliefs and executing those who question them DOES confer harm. As does your taking of others' property.
While Linux is huge, for a backdoor to be successful it would need to hit a huge number of systems. The majority of the kernel at this point tends to be drivers, not all of which are used in a given kernel.
For it to be even remotely worthwhile, it'd have to be placed into something that was both heavily used AND given little attention. These two positions are almost mutually exclusive.
Can anyone think of a place that would fall into these two categories? Even the more seemingly obscure parts of the kernel get attention fairly often and malicious changes wouldn't go unnoticed for long.
It's likely that there's no difference. Even if it were the artists distributing directly, they'd probably screw them over just the same.
Most of the time, at least in my experience, there's no concept of "taking a stand" that drives it. It's all about "why pay when I can get it for free? You bought it? What a moron!" that drives this.
That's not related at all to Stephen King's attempt. He tried doing the suggested pay-by-chapter method where readers could optionally pay if they liked it, and it ended up being a waste of his time. I don't know if he bothered to wrap the novel up and publish it the regular way or just gave up on it.
And I never said they shouldn't give their music away for free, that's entirely -their- call. My issue is with the OPs suggestion that they repudiate their copyright, which is needless self-punishment that opens the door for someone else to make use of it without ever acknowledging the source (thus defeating the point of said "promotion" entirely.)
On the contrary, they are the only ones who will likely see any sort of success from it as the hard part, promotion, is already paid for. Everyone knows who Radiohead is, so people flocked in server crushing numbers to their website for their new album. However for new artists like the one you linked, it'll give him goodwill among small circles but it doesn't have nearly the punch as getting on the radio (another jar of worms) or your music on some movie soundtrack (which is what the giant labels do.)
And again, releasing one's music has nothing to do with OPs suggestion of releasing without copyright. Said movie studio will just have some famous name cover your song and leave you out to dry.
I see you're falling into the trench of "I have it figured out for $medium, therefore copyright is moot." Unfortunately, not everything falls under those banners.
And what about movies or TV shows where such product placement would be horribly out of place? A medieval movie with GM/GE/Pepsi placements? Hell even my favorite hobby, anime, was getting into it with Code Geass, which was packed FULL of Pizza Hut ads which were distracting and ended up being the butt of jokes there were so many.
I recall Stephen King trying this and giving up.
Or they'll give up, when they find that they can't recoup the costs of production, much less make a profit.
You can't eat drive and talent (well you can, but it's considered anti-social...) I don't see people making entire movies and TV series that they just toss up on the internet unless they've got some greater source of funding to ensure they won't go broke in the process.
Which is pointless, since if you repudiate the copyright on your works (ALL of your works) then someone else might as well hang at your shows and sell knockoffs of what you're selling. And signings have limited effectiveness beyond single authors/bands, I'd like to see how you would fund the creation of an entire TV series with that.
Copyright is a very effective tool to allow for the creation of easily duplicated works without sticking it to the creators and essentially punishing them for making the investment. It needs to be reworked and it needs respect. However, the internet audience is extremely insular, rude, and just as selfish and greedy as the MPAA/RIAA (and member companies) when it comes to these things.
They already do this.
There's currently an effort to see what progress can be made with the Motorola A1600/A1800 MING 2s, but as they're finding the CPU:
- CRCs the bootloader which
- CRCs the kernel / checks the kernel signature which
- Uses SELinux to confirm the security of the read-only filesystems.
Sure they can boot a kernel after transferring it via USB, but there's no way they're going to be writing a custom kernel or filesystem to the flash and getting it to boot without convincing Motorola to sell versions of the phone with no bootloader CRC check.
It's called an anti-Tivoization clause and was added to the GPLv3, which incidentally does not apply to the Linux kernel. Efforts like the LiMo foundation are focused on implementing a user-space that is completely non-GPL to avoid the issue. Getting that source code requires you be a member of the foundation, which is $10k anuually for vendors and $100k annually for handset manufacturers.
Yes they want to take advantage of your hard work. No they don't want to give back to you. They do the bare minimum that they can to stay legal and will return to the community a kernel that boots, but does not fully support the hardware it drives (go go closed source kernel modules.)
OpenMoko is about the software, not the hardware. It can't be because the Freerunner is light years behind the G1 and every other smartphone out there. There have been efforts to port it to other hardware, but generally doing so is difficult because of the mobile arena being a very end-user hostile environment.
OpenMoko and Android are mutually exclusive, unless you really have a thing for getting your phone to dual-boot operating systems.