Quick aside: Most iTunes content is unencrypted 256 kbps AAC audio these days. I play it on all kinds of non-Apple devices.
The only remaining anti-piracy mechanism is the inclusion of your real name and email address in each song's metadata. This can be stripped, but there's no real point unless you do actually intend on breaking the law repeatedly.
Only because AOL utterly failed to capitalize on their market dominance or prepare for the future. What did they think, dialup would last forever? That people would actually want their terrible service on top of broadband?
Piracy should be dealt with in the same way ICAAN dealt with domain tasting. For individuals running a P2P program in which they gain no money from the distribution, $30 per song is plenty for compensation. $100 per song is perfectly fine for punitive damages. If that's not enough money to make up for legal fees, get together with law enforcement and legislators and create a system similar to parking or speeding tickets. That'll keep costs down.
If I got caught illegally distributing 10 songs and got slapped with a $1300 fine (enough to purchase 100x the number of songs I got for free), I'd think twice about piracy. And that's an amount I can pay off. I keep that much in reserve at all times for car repairs, emergencies, etc.
1.92 million dollars is some fucking criminal, life-ruining BULLSHIT. Bankruptcy and garnished wages for life is not an acceptable outcome for a truly petty crime.
Someone needs to get into the next town hall meeting Obama attends and ask this question. Someone needs to get the words in roughly the form I have written here to the president of the United States on a televised, public event.
Captain Planet served no one at all, except maybe those who were directly involved in making the show. Not politicians, not the people, and definitely not the planet.
All the villains in Captain Planet wanted to trash the planet for no reason at all. They'd build factories that did nothing but pump (glowing green) toxic waste into the ocean. If that show wanted to really get things done, it would have vilified the real culprits in ruining the planet. I don't mean anyone who burns more than their share of fossil fuels. I'm talking about companies that dump large quantities of heavy metals and carcinogens into the environment and political deals that incentivize 3rd world countries to embrace slash and burn farming and strip mining.
Too bad that show would be uncomfortable, boring, and gunned down on political grounds.
If organizations with "green" or conversationalist initiatives as basically your sole customers, why would you charge more than you need to for a domain name and then hand some of the profits back to the same set of companies? In this case, wouldn't it be best to just lower your prices and run as a straight non-profit?
Or for all the giving back bullshit, is this yet another poorly conceived attempt at cashing in on the popularity of the green movement? Who am I kidding? This yet another poorly conceived attempt at cashing in on the popularity of the green movement.
[no one has lopped off an arm and felt an itch for it after all...]
Clearly you've never lost a limb. Phantom limb sensations cover pressure, pain, temperature, and irritation. You definitely can feel an itch on an arm or leg that has been lopped off.
The father is rich, well-connected to the police, and hellbent on getting the word out, yet he couldn't even get more than the most basic details of the crime. It's an extremely sad state of affairs.
I read "10p/minute customer support line" and realized what the issue was. You're living in a country that isn't the United States! Simply correct the error by moving here and you'll find Apple's tech support to be fast, courteous, and free both over the phone or in person at hundreds of retail locations.
Even if they could monitor it wirelessly, they should have just carefully disabled the wireless transmission (aluminum foil?) and grabbed whoever came to check in on it.
HDTV gave people more detail (something they actually wanted) while at the same time freeing up a great deal of radio bandwidth in the switch to digital.
No one wants 3D TV, so why is it being developed? Isn't market testing supposed to weed out dumb ideas like this? Hell, 3D barely maintains its status as a novelty in movie theaters, and there it's backed by huge ad campaigns and popular content. It can't even gain traction in the technology-obsessed, immersion-seeking gamer community!
3D TV makes watching TV more complex and expensive without giving back much of value. The television is too casual a medium to complicate with shutter glasses. Until the free-standing 3D projector is invented, television should remain a 2D affair.
How long can Apple keep this up? The iPhone app store has been a great thing, but slam after slam of bad press against it is slowly turning the opinion of the technically inclined. If they don't do something soon, they're going to end up like Sony circa 2007.
Your body already has the right balance of insulin. Periodically injecting it is an incredibly stupid if it's for the sake of vanity. You could end up in the hospital for hypoglycemia. In the long term, you could develop insulin resistance followed by Type II Diabetes.
If I had to name one thing that turned off the most beginning programmers, it's the difficulty of setting up a project that will allow them meaningful graphical output. In C++, just getting the compiler all set to link the right libraries requires a great deal of knowledge. Issues like frame rate regulation, loading images, and initializing windows are insurmountable hurdles to the beginner and it's incredibly frustrating.
Everyone wants to make a game-like project at first. Python has libraries like Pygame (SDL+utility binding) and PyOpenGL (OpenGL binding) that make it VERY attractive to the beginning programmer. Very, very few languages allow windows, image loading, sound loading, and drawing to happen with as little nonsense as Python and Pygame.
No, I bet they can. The user might, MIGHT, be able to stake some sort of claim to the arrangement of the parts, but on the whole, the actual creature modeling involves deforming and placing pre-made parts.
Adobe can't claim copyright to your photo retouchings, but if you made a collage out of their sample photos and started selling it, they might object.
While it's sad that he spent 6 whole years on the project with not much to show for it, I'm sure it wasn't a complete waste of time. Look at the skills learned here: latency-minded networking code, 3D graphics, control basics... it's not like he spent the time watching trash TV.
I suppose since Amazon and Google are taking the time to scan, clean up, edit, typeset, and republish these books, they should feel free to sell them like they'd sell it like any publisher can with other public domain works.
The fact that the books are rare doesn't change the situation legally. If someone wanted to buy the restored Amazon/Google reprint of a rare public domain book, scan it, run it through OCR, remove the formatting, and give it away for free, they could. If someone else then took that text and printed it out into a book and sold it, they could do that too.
How do you figure this? That's like saying photorealistic CGI won't be possible until AI is perfected. It's just nonsensical.
Convincing synthetic voices will require physical modeling of the lungs, vocal cords, larynx, throat, mouth, lips, tongue, and nasal passages. Intonation and speech patterns will be imparted by human sound artists.
I kept thinking of PostScript when I wrote "Fonts do not contain executable code.", but I felt that explaining the situation would only confuse my point. You're right, some fonts do contain code, but it's just commands that drive a virtual (or sometimes hardware) state machine. The interpreter could contain a buffer overflow like any code that accepts input, but the risk is relatively low compared to a language that knows it's on a computer and has the ability to break manipulate files.
Slashdot Mirror
Quick aside: Most iTunes content is unencrypted 256 kbps AAC audio these days. I play it on all kinds of non-Apple devices.
The only remaining anti-piracy mechanism is the inclusion of your real name and email address in each song's metadata. This can be stripped, but there's no real point unless you do actually intend on breaking the law repeatedly.
Only because AOL utterly failed to capitalize on their market dominance or prepare for the future. What did they think, dialup would last forever? That people would actually want their terrible service on top of broadband?
Piracy should be dealt with in the same way ICAAN dealt with domain tasting. For individuals running a P2P program in which they gain no money from the distribution, $30 per song is plenty for compensation. $100 per song is perfectly fine for punitive damages. If that's not enough money to make up for legal fees, get together with law enforcement and legislators and create a system similar to parking or speeding tickets. That'll keep costs down.
If I got caught illegally distributing 10 songs and got slapped with a $1300 fine (enough to purchase 100x the number of songs I got for free), I'd think twice about piracy. And that's an amount I can pay off. I keep that much in reserve at all times for car repairs, emergencies, etc.
1.92 million dollars is some fucking criminal, life-ruining BULLSHIT. Bankruptcy and garnished wages for life is not an acceptable outcome for a truly petty crime.
Someone needs to get into the next town hall meeting Obama attends and ask this question. Someone needs to get the words in roughly the form I have written here to the president of the United States on a televised, public event.
Captain Planet served no one at all, except maybe those who were directly involved in making the show. Not politicians, not the people, and definitely not the planet.
All the villains in Captain Planet wanted to trash the planet for no reason at all. They'd build factories that did nothing but pump (glowing green) toxic waste into the ocean. If that show wanted to really get things done, it would have vilified the real culprits in ruining the planet. I don't mean anyone who burns more than their share of fossil fuels. I'm talking about companies that dump large quantities of heavy metals and carcinogens into the environment and political deals that incentivize 3rd world countries to embrace slash and burn farming and strip mining.
Too bad that show would be uncomfortable, boring, and gunned down on political grounds.
If organizations with "green" or conversationalist initiatives as basically your sole customers, why would you charge more than you need to for a domain name and then hand some of the profits back to the same set of companies? In this case, wouldn't it be best to just lower your prices and run as a straight non-profit?
Or for all the giving back bullshit, is this yet another poorly conceived attempt at cashing in on the popularity of the green movement? Who am I kidding? This yet another poorly conceived attempt at cashing in on the popularity of the green movement.
Wow, that's a very interesting way to interpret the history of KHTML/Webkit development.
[no one has lopped off an arm and felt an itch for it after all...]
Clearly you've never lost a limb. Phantom limb sensations cover pressure, pain, temperature, and irritation. You definitely can feel an itch on an arm or leg that has been lopped off.
Removal of parasites, probably.
The father is rich, well-connected to the police, and hellbent on getting the word out, yet he couldn't even get more than the most basic details of the crime. It's an extremely sad state of affairs.
If a sauce is supposed to run when poured, but doesn't, beating it never helps. Simmering over low heat is a much better option.
I read "10p/minute customer support line" and realized what the issue was. You're living in a country that isn't the United States! Simply correct the error by moving here and you'll find Apple's tech support to be fast, courteous, and free both over the phone or in person at hundreds of retail locations.
Even if they could monitor it wirelessly, they should have just carefully disabled the wireless transmission (aluminum foil?) and grabbed whoever came to check in on it.
Article contains the terms "ATM Machine" and "PIN Number". Read at your own risk.
HDTV gave people more detail (something they actually wanted) while at the same time freeing up a great deal of radio bandwidth in the switch to digital.
No one wants 3D TV, so why is it being developed? Isn't market testing supposed to weed out dumb ideas like this? Hell, 3D barely maintains its status as a novelty in movie theaters, and there it's backed by huge ad campaigns and popular content. It can't even gain traction in the technology-obsessed, immersion-seeking gamer community!
3D TV makes watching TV more complex and expensive without giving back much of value. The television is too casual a medium to complicate with shutter glasses. Until the free-standing 3D projector is invented, television should remain a 2D affair.
How long can Apple keep this up? The iPhone app store has been a great thing, but slam after slam of bad press against it is slowly turning the opinion of the technically inclined. If they don't do something soon, they're going to end up like Sony circa 2007.
Your body already has the right balance of insulin. Periodically injecting it is an incredibly stupid if it's for the sake of vanity. You could end up in the hospital for hypoglycemia. In the long term, you could develop insulin resistance followed by Type II Diabetes.
So in the future, we'll all have superhuman healing abilities and sparkle like our skin is covered in millions of diamonds?
Stephanie Meyer: modern day prophet.
Do you happen to have a metal plate in your head?
If I had to name one thing that turned off the most beginning programmers, it's the difficulty of setting up a project that will allow them meaningful graphical output. In C++, just getting the compiler all set to link the right libraries requires a great deal of knowledge. Issues like frame rate regulation, loading images, and initializing windows are insurmountable hurdles to the beginner and it's incredibly frustrating.
Everyone wants to make a game-like project at first. Python has libraries like Pygame (SDL+utility binding) and PyOpenGL (OpenGL binding) that make it VERY attractive to the beginning programmer. Very, very few languages allow windows, image loading, sound loading, and drawing to happen with as little nonsense as Python and Pygame.
No, I bet they can. The user might, MIGHT, be able to stake some sort of claim to the arrangement of the parts, but on the whole, the actual creature modeling involves deforming and placing pre-made parts.
Adobe can't claim copyright to your photo retouchings, but if you made a collage out of their sample photos and started selling it, they might object.
While it's sad that he spent 6 whole years on the project with not much to show for it, I'm sure it wasn't a complete waste of time. Look at the skills learned here: latency-minded networking code, 3D graphics, control basics... it's not like he spent the time watching trash TV.
I suppose since Amazon and Google are taking the time to scan, clean up, edit, typeset, and republish these books, they should feel free to sell them like they'd sell it like any publisher can with other public domain works. The fact that the books are rare doesn't change the situation legally. If someone wanted to buy the restored Amazon/Google reprint of a rare public domain book, scan it, run it through OCR, remove the formatting, and give it away for free, they could. If someone else then took that text and printed it out into a book and sold it, they could do that too.
How do you figure this? That's like saying photorealistic CGI won't be possible until AI is perfected. It's just nonsensical.
Convincing synthetic voices will require physical modeling of the lungs, vocal cords, larynx, throat, mouth, lips, tongue, and nasal passages. Intonation and speech patterns will be imparted by human sound artists.
I kept thinking of PostScript when I wrote "Fonts do not contain executable code.", but I felt that explaining the situation would only confuse my point. You're right, some fonts do contain code, but it's just commands that drive a virtual (or sometimes hardware) state machine. The interpreter could contain a buffer overflow like any code that accepts input, but the risk is relatively low compared to a language that knows it's on a computer and has the ability to break manipulate files.
No, but they sometimes kill geese with the toxins they emit. And organisms not affected by the toxins would probably enjoy eating a dead goose.