A major problem with Kazaa is that it only hashes the first 32K of any file. Any glitches after that go undetected. This is why I won't be sorry to see Kazaa lose out to Overnet, or some other network which hashes the whole file.
And if it has to be USB, then why put USB 1.1 on a new product when the rest of the world is dealing with USB 2?
'Cause the board is cheaper. Also, it's the fastest fanless model. Having said that, I agree. If I bought something like this, fast connection to an external backup drive would be a must.
A prototype digital video system producing images of such high quality that the human eye struggles to distinguish them from reality has been developed by Japanese engineers.
But this is HDTV! It's got better resolution than the real world!
It's nice to see creativity rewarded. If ideas only ever occurred to exactly one person, patents might be a good idea. Ideas don't pop out of nowhere however; most inventions depend upon previous inventions and ideas. In a world of millions of experienced engineers, there may be hundreds or thousands of equally talented people who will solve a given problem in exactly the same way. The patent system rewards only the first person. Worse, it forbids all other people from using the same solution. What a block on human creativity!
I accept that rewarding the first might motivate a person to work harder. However, it does this by forcibly preventing everybody else from using that same solution to their problems. How can we demonstrate that the possible motivational effect on the one is worth the limitations on the potential of so many others?
A mere $US5,000 would be something of a price sensation by the standards of current large capacity SSDs,
whose prices aren't dropping nearly as quickly as are those of magnetic media.
Things must have improved since the late 60's in terms of aerodynamics, CAD, engine power etc etc
Yes, but those same things benefit subsonic aviation too. Concorde II might be much quieter, but tolerance to noise has gone down too. It's no good being cheaper if the commercial competition has got cheaper even faster.
Yes, I think it's true. I also think it's part of a larger I.T. phenomenon where systems are rated on how difficult they were to build and not how useful they are. In general systems get respect if:
They've got lots of lines of code
The staff cost lots of money
The technology cost lots of money
So, write a database front end with Perl and DBI in two weeks, and that's virtually an admin task. Get a team of five high-paid Java developers using Weblogic to do the same thing in six months, and that's worthy of respect!
Anarchy is the absence of rulers, not the absence of rules. One obvious difficulty with anarchy then is the question of which rules should be followed. A solution could be to adopt a fixed set of rules. An example could be law as set out in a religious text. This is one way a society could have lots of rules without any centralised political authority. Another example is medieval Europe which was quite anarchic compared to modern times, but relatively law abiding thanks to the tradition of written law passed down from Roman times.
Okay, obviously Slashdot has moved on, so I suppose this is more of a private conversation now.
Obviously citing a couple of examples cannot prove that regulation is bad in general but for what it's worth, here are two:
The first one is minimum wage regulation. Suppose I am unemployed, but in a free market, and several people offer to employee me at £3.00 per hour. If I'm unhappy about this I might approach each potential employer and suggest I'm undecided on which offer to take up, but for £3.50 I will take it on the spot. Now if all of them refuse that might suggest it isn't worth their while to employee me at that rate. My options are to grin and bear it, or stay unemployed.
If the state now makes it illegal to employee a person at less than £4 per hour I now have no options. It isn't worth their while to employ me at that rate. It's illegal to employee me at a lower rate. I stay unemployed.
Another example from the E.U. is that it is illegal to price fruit and vegetables in imperial units, which strikes me as ridiculous.
Why is market regulation a necessity? Your analogy with policing is a false one. The best reason for policing is to stop people from interfering with my life, e.g., through theft and murder, whereas market regulation interferes with my life. Not only are these things different, they're opposed. One increases my freedom to live my life unhindered and the other actually decreases it.
There's a major problem with this story. Domesday was based on Laserdisc which was not analogue but digital. Kuro5hin covered this , and got the facts right, months ago
The moral of the story, speaking as a UK TV licence-payer is: don't trust the BBC. Not to keep our data safe, and not to do a decent job of tech reporting either.
Following the rules of English, in the construction "GNU Linux" the word "GNU" modifies "Linux". This can mean either "GNU's version of Linux" or "Linux, which is a GNU package." Neither of those meanings fits the situation at hand.
So why not Linux GNU, meaning "Linux version of GNU", which seems to be what FSF are claiming.
My first thought was that it was pretty simple too.
My second thought was Microsoft have made you dependent upon them purely for their convenience.
What happens when they begin to lose interest in their little scheme? Perhaps they choose to cut back on support costs for their licence server one day. Why not? Only the user will be inconvenienced if the server should go down.
I appreciate that Microsoft are professionals with a reputation to uphold, but other firms, especially firms in some financial trouble, won't always be so good.
Ultimately, I don't want to be forced to be dependent on somebody when it's purely for that somebody's convenience.
Why is that that ill-thought out excuses for state interference always get modded up to 'Insightful', whilst the rebuttals get put down?
Mind you, it doesn't help that you are posting this anonymously. I guess your reference to Blunkett's disability don't help much either, but other than that, well said.
The government may be justified in banning my activity where that interferes with your activity, and where you don't consent. If I broadcast on frequencies you use for your favourite television programme / mobile phone / wireless network, then I interfere with your activity without your consent. This is the justification for the FCC.
If I sell a television which cannot receive a digital transmission, this only affects the seller and the buyer of that television set. What is the justification for the FCC to be involved? There is none. The only principle they're using here is 'might is right', in this case the might of government against business and consumers.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, that makes a lot of sense. Might Tivo also be concerned that some of the unauthorised images may have been altered in some malicious way?
Must have been warm there.
A major problem with Kazaa is that it only hashes the first 32K of any file. Any glitches after that go undetected. This is why I won't be sorry to see Kazaa lose out to Overnet, or some other network which hashes the whole file.
'Cause the board is cheaper. Also, it's the fastest fanless model. Having said that, I agree. If I bought something like this, fast connection to an external backup drive would be a must.
When Microsoft figure out how to index a mail folder, they can turn their attention to the internet.
I accept that rewarding the first might motivate a person to work harder. However, it does this by forcibly preventing everybody else from using that same solution to their problems. How can we demonstrate that the possible motivational effect on the one is worth the limitations on the potential of so many others?
Anybody built a short-wave array antenna?
This was also pointed on Saturday's Slashdot Story
Aaarrgh! My screen is watching me!
2. I agree there needs to enforcement. I'm just not sure enforcement need be centralized.
3. I can't provide an example, I don't think one exists. I'd be interested to see it tried but it doesn't seem to be a very popular idea.
I guess I don't think life is fair, or ever will be. I just want to be left in peace.
- They've got lots of lines of code
- The staff cost lots of money
- The technology cost lots of money
So, write a database front end with Perl and DBI in two weeks, and that's virtually an admin task. Get a team of five high-paid Java developers using Weblogic to do the same thing in six months, and that's worthy of respect!Anarchy is the absence of rulers, not the absence of rules. One obvious difficulty with anarchy then is the question of which rules should be followed. A solution could be to adopt a fixed set of rules. An example could be law as set out in a religious text. This is one way a society could have lots of rules without any centralised political authority. Another example is medieval Europe which was quite anarchic compared to modern times, but relatively law abiding thanks to the tradition of written law passed down from Roman times.
Obviously citing a couple of examples cannot prove that regulation is bad in general but for what it's worth, here are two:
The first one is minimum wage regulation. Suppose I am unemployed, but in a free market, and several people offer to employee me at £3.00 per hour. If I'm unhappy about this I might approach each potential employer and suggest I'm undecided on which offer to take up, but for £3.50 I will take it on the spot. Now if all of them refuse that might suggest it isn't worth their while to employee me at that rate. My options are to grin and bear it, or stay unemployed.
If the state now makes it illegal to employee a person at less than £4 per hour I now have no options. It isn't worth their while to employ me at that rate. It's illegal to employee me at a lower rate. I stay unemployed.
Another example from the E.U. is that it is illegal to price fruit and vegetables in imperial units, which strikes me as ridiculous.
Why is market regulation a necessity? Your analogy with policing is a false one. The best reason for policing is to stop people from interfering with my life, e.g., through theft and murder, whereas market regulation interferes with my life. Not only are these things different, they're opposed. One increases my freedom to live my life unhindered and the other actually decreases it.
The moral of the story, speaking as a UK TV licence-payer is: don't trust the BBC. Not to keep our data safe, and not to do a decent job of tech reporting either.
Shane Treacy is a l0ser
If a Gameboy can disrupt an airliner, shouldn't Boeing be doing something to fix this?
Your view of the California debacle is not uncontroversial
My second thought was Microsoft have made you dependent upon them purely for their convenience.
What happens when they begin to lose interest in their little scheme? Perhaps they choose to cut back on support costs for their licence server one day. Why not? Only the user will be inconvenienced if the server should go down.
I appreciate that Microsoft are professionals with a reputation to uphold, but other firms, especially firms in some financial trouble, won't always be so good.
Ultimately, I don't want to be forced to be dependent on somebody when it's purely for that somebody's convenience.
Why is that that ill-thought out excuses for state interference always get modded up to 'Insightful', whilst the rebuttals get put down?
Mind you, it doesn't help that you are posting this anonymously. I guess your reference to Blunkett's disability don't help much either, but other than that, well said.
If I sell a television which cannot receive a digital transmission, this only affects the seller and the buyer of that television set. What is the justification for the FCC to be involved? There is none. The only principle they're using here is 'might is right', in this case the might of government against business and consumers.
Eg., if I overclock a processor, which is a way of modifying it, I get a better service without paying for it. That certainly would not be stealing.
That's not to say that piracy is right, only that your argument is wrong.