the sony one used a surface to contain the video, whereas the siftables have their own screen and apparently contain tilt and motion sensors not just position on the surface screen. hence they have a lot more gestures. But Sony had the basic idea working.
Speaking of poison, any word if this will handle the silverlight DRM? I'd like to watch movies from netflix, so frankly I'm hoping it does. ( And all you DRM fetish purists can just tighten your chastity belts another notch. ooh the temptation. Hey just tell yourself it's okay cause you're doing it on linux--take that Borg!)
It's subtle. It's not your reading or speechifying the text that is the essential problem. It's amazon's effective sales of that right. The book is wrapped in DRM so conversion of that to speech directly by the Kindle is the problem. If you have some other way of enjoying the printed text, including reading it aloud or even rigging up your own OCR to do it for you, I think this presumably fair use (if it's for limited distribution). But it's not fair use to offer the conversion wholesale or automatically.
To clarify this, imagine amazon bundled with the text the audio book read by a human. This is clearly not what they contracted to do when they were permiotted to distribute the text version. But there's no essential difference here about how the voice edition is generated. So just becuase the kindle does it does not make it more legal.
This is still no different than if I handed my Kindle to my friend and they read aloud to me.
Sure it is. Otherwise why do people pay a premium for recorded books. It's because your friend is not there. Your friend may not be there to read you to sleep, as you work in the kitchen or drive the car. They are selling you this single serving friend who will read it anytime you want for a small fee.
No I paid extra to have Stephen Hawking read the book.
I think the point here is that what current text to voice converters are ghastly, this will not always be the case. In the future you will be able to have Marylin Monroe or John F. Kennedy read your book outloud and it will sound exactly right.
They are selling the book in a DRM form precisely so they can split the reading rights from the voice rights. Ideally they can make more profit that way. You are free to buy it in both forms. You might not like that but if there is competition in the market one can presume an efficient market can deliver each at a lower cost as a result of the extra profit to be made. So in theory it could benefit the consumer. And indeed the DRM versions are cheaper than than the print version in many cases.
You might object to that because it seems like you lost some traditional right of ownership. But until people invented text -to voice converters you never missed this did you? it's only when this became possible that you noticed that they did not want you to do it. so it's not a traditional right. Moreover, if you read the book out loud yourself then sold the recornding you would have been sued.
SO they do have a point.
The place where it goes off the rails is if you use this to listen to the book with no intention of reselling the voice conversion. What's wrong with that? DOn't you "own" it.
I think the answer is that, it's not you that committed the infringement, it's Amazon for making it possible. Afterall amazon sells both forms written and audio. Now they are selling both for the price of the DRM written version. You can see why the booksellers are mad.
I was under the impression that the Roku had a modest buffer in it. The streamed netflix content really stinks for me. I have comcast and after 6pm at night I get all sorts of interruptions. I can't figure out who to blame. When I do a traceroute I see the latency if about 0.5 seconds and there are 5 hops just within the the limelight system Netflix uses. Plus half the time the resolution goes to hell.
So I had assumed the reason to pay for roku was it somehow worked better than the ultra-craptastic silverlight system Netflix has.
Also it's worth noting that even for-profit companies like Sun and Apple often open source their code (e.g. apple's Darwin Kernel and openSolaris). And those companies have much better security reputations than Microsoft.
No one forced Apple to sell their OS divorced of their machines. They decided to do that to cash in on the lucrative market of OS upgrades.
If they don't want people installing their OS on 'unapproved' machines, they have a simple and clear course to follow, don't sell the OS without a machine.
well that's what they are trying to do with the lic. So how exactly would they enforce what you reccomend any other way? Put hardware DRM in the machines or something? Why make it more complicated if the net outcome is supposed to be the same: Apple software is to be run on apple machines only.
If Psystar want's to compete, let them compete. Apple competes by creating products, Psystar is simply riding their coat tails. The government forcing a company to operate in areas they deem unprofitable is not fair competition in the marketplace.
exactly. meddling in the market makes it unfair not more fair. Apple is only a 10% player in the computer market so their bussiness model is not in restraint of trade for computers.
Apple should form a "discount buyers club". To belong to the club you have to buy an apple computer. Then you get 90% discounts on the operating system updates priced at $1000 retail.
This is going to be great for power users--the kind that read slashdot.
Why? chances are you want to use Linux or a mac but you can't because the typical user has a handful of application that 1) they have to run concurrently 2) that require windows.
For example, a lot of people MUST use windows (or a mac) because they have no alternative to running Word or Excell or some enterprise app.
but really just how many apps require MS?
the thing keeping virtualization from taking off is that windows is not cheap. But with a starter edition it could be made cheap.
run sun's virtual box. then you can run windows and linux seamlessly at the same time. FOr the aplications that require windows you use windows.
this would probably work out well.
However it won't actually work for the low end user. The lowend user is not going to have the sophistication to run two operating systems.
It may work out however for the high enduser that has the savy and extra computer resources needed to virtualize
Articles that I edit on wikipedia get flagged as being arguments because I usually edit them from both my home and work computers. as a reult when I am in a mood to edit there is rapid fire changes from multiple IP addresses. I see warnings when I log in that it looks like I'm in a dispute and I may be banned if further revisions occur.
That makes no sense at all. First all you are saying is that lowest order state of the vortex has 4 modes. But Why can't I have folds on the vortex, just as one can have folds in a magnetic bubble, to make higher order states? e.g. instead of having a pair of dipoles one had a pair quadrupoles.
As for them being smaller than bubbles, I'm not sure how you know this. For example, vertical storage in harddisks (akin to bubbles) is denser than longitudunal storage (akin to vorticies).
Presumably these Zombie bots try to hit a series of predefined URLS to announce their availability.
Relatively simple bots access a few URLs or an IRC channel, but many are more sophisticated than that these days, unfortunately. One strategy is to have a complex URL generator that deterministically spews out a couple of hundred http://fri4eie943kejkz.com/ garbage addresses per day, the botnet herder need only register one of them to deliver updates etc. Of course the algorithm can be reversed by sufficiently good analysts, so the next level up is for the botnet to form its own p2p network. Some of these are advanced, fully distributed systems employing encryption, automatic command and control failover (no central point of failure), "fast flux" DNS to present a constantly moving target etc. They are basically impossible to shut down, even if the legal will to do so across borders existed.
Exactly. So if you have a bot in captivity you see what addresses of the day it is going to.
Any computer that visits one of these gets flagged as infected.
No uninfected computer would visit any of them let alone all of them.
You could even push this up a level and simply looks for large numbers of DNS requests by different computers for the same invalid addresses. one could imagine that a mispublished URL could get a lot of legitimate computers making a bugus DNS request but if unrelated computers make the same 100 requests it seems pretty clear you could flag this.
Their is an apocryphal story that the soviets invested heavily in ternary logic and it was physically to hard to implement that it set them back a decade.
At the time, most memory was static memory which draws a current even in the quiescent state. it's easy to think about binary currents, they go one way or the other. What's a trinary current?
Much much later on memory went to charge storage (dynamic memory). This only drew current during switching but none when it was quiescent.
This memory stored levels of charge. You could imaging this might be much easier to implement multiple bits. However, then you would have had to have some way of modulating the amount of charge delivered instead of just opening a gate and letting the capacitor fully charge. In most cases the obvious idea of reverse polarizing the capacitor would make no sense from the point of view of the transitors unidirectionality.
so trinary logic never made any hardware sense.
in the physical world where we have X and Y and sometimes Z, all the modes tend to be multiples of 2 naturally (+/-x +/-y +/i z).
you just use one of the magnetic mirrors (slashdot a few days ago) that creates a monopole field. The tornadoes will be repelled by the induced image monopoles.
This sounds a lot like magnetic bubble memory that intel, fujitsu, IMB and TI made in the 1980s.
That too had multiple states per "bubble". However the higher-order bubbles were generally not used. The reason was, it was hard enough keeping the single bit (zeroth order mode) bubbles stable at high circulation and high density.
Since here the domains are fixed and the disk moves it might be easier to use higher order magnetic domain modes.
The "good" spam is sort of like a public education campaign about STDs. It's part of a well rounded solution in raising public awareness. Your's may not need raising but you will benefit if the awareness of others' is raised so put up with it.
Now then there's the post infection detection problem. We could take a simmilar approach of turning a bad thing to our advantage. Presumably these Zombie bots try to hit a series of predefined URLS to announce their availability. Once some of those are known, when not sieze them and use them to get infected computers to self-identify then notify the owners or if unresponsive their ISPs?
That would not cure all infection. But there is a well known principal in medial virus infection called the R-factor and that is the minimum number of infections needed in a population before the disease becomes self sustaining or growing in infections. We don't have to eliminate all zombies before we reach a point where the infection rate is highly damped.
it's fear. If tens of million of people can't watch TV for a week, there's going to be a lot of grumpy people. I suspect that some people won't even be able to sleep without their before bedtime TV ritual.
Just like when there's a black out and there's increase rioting there will be people milling around with nothing to do looking for trouble.
Yes a few "enlightened" individuals will have a rebirth as they discover life without TV. I predict a raft of books on the topic of self actualization in 6 months.
But a much large set will not take it well I think.
Then of course there's the simple logistics of how you stock and sell that many flat screen TVs. I suspect this is non-trivial. There just are not that many unhelpful sales clerks to go around, let alone to process the returns when people find a better buy the next week.
Don't say cable cause there are even less cable instalers and they are even less helpful.
plus think of your broadband when everyone on your block gets cable plus internet.
Slashdot Mirror
Here's something very simmilar from sony in 2001.
the sony one used a surface to contain the video, whereas the siftables have their own screen and apparently contain tilt and motion sensors not just position on the surface screen. hence they have a lot more gestures. But Sony had the basic idea working.
Speaking of poison, any word if this will handle the silverlight DRM? I'd like to watch movies from netflix, so frankly I'm hoping it does. ( And all you DRM fetish purists can just tighten your chastity belts another notch. ooh the temptation. Hey just tell yourself it's okay cause you're doing it on linux--take that Borg!)
Right. And Don't forget they are counting cell phones too! Only 13 lost per year. The FBI should send their agents to los alamos for cyber training.
It's subtle. It's not your reading or speechifying the text that is the essential problem. It's amazon's effective sales of that right. The book is wrapped in DRM so conversion of that to speech directly by the Kindle is the problem. If you have some other way of enjoying the printed text, including reading it aloud or even rigging up your own OCR to do it for you, I think this presumably fair use (if it's for limited distribution). But it's not fair use to offer the conversion wholesale or automatically.
To clarify this, imagine amazon bundled with the text the audio book read by a human. This is clearly not what they contracted to do when they were permiotted to distribute the text version. But there's no essential difference here about how the voice edition is generated. So just becuase the kindle does it does not make it more legal.
This is still no different than if I handed my Kindle to my friend and they read aloud to me.
Sure it is. Otherwise why do people pay a premium for recorded books. It's because your friend is not there. Your friend may not be there to read you to sleep, as you work in the kitchen or drive the car. They are selling you this single serving friend who will read it anytime you want for a small fee.
No I paid extra to have Stephen Hawking read the book.
I think the point here is that what current text to voice converters are ghastly, this will not always be the case. In the future you will be able to have Marylin Monroe or John F. Kennedy read your book outloud and it will sound exactly right.
They are selling the book in a DRM form precisely so they can split the reading rights from the voice rights. Ideally they can make more profit that way. You are free to buy it in both forms. You might not like that but if there is competition in the market one can presume an efficient market can deliver each at a lower cost as a result of the extra profit to be made. So in theory it could benefit the consumer. And indeed the DRM versions are cheaper than than the print version in many cases.
You might object to that because it seems like you lost some traditional right of ownership. But until people invented text -to voice converters you never missed this did you? it's only when this became possible that you noticed that they did not want you to do it. so it's not a traditional right. Moreover, if you read the book out loud yourself then sold the recornding you would have been sued.
SO they do have a point.
The place where it goes off the rails is if you use this to listen to the book with no intention of reselling the voice conversion. What's wrong with that? DOn't you "own" it.
I think the answer is that, it's not you that committed the infringement, it's Amazon for making it possible. Afterall amazon sells both forms written and audio. Now they are selling both for the price of the DRM written version. You can see why the booksellers are mad.
I was under the impression that the Roku had a modest buffer in it. The streamed netflix content really stinks for me. I have comcast and after 6pm at night I get all sorts of interruptions. I can't figure out who to blame. When I do a traceroute I see the latency if about 0.5 seconds and there are 5 hops just within the the limelight system Netflix uses. Plus half the time the resolution goes to hell.
So I had assumed the reason to pay for roku was it somehow worked better than the ultra-craptastic silverlight system Netflix has.
Why? The point of Roku is that you can get netflix content. The BoxeeBox is not going to do that.
Since 2004 The source code for windows is available for $20 on blackhat websites. SO it's avaialble for scrutiny by a very select few since possession is criminal.
Also it's worth noting that even for-profit companies like Sun and Apple often open source their code (e.g. apple's Darwin Kernel and openSolaris). And those companies have much better security reputations than Microsoft.
If the government were to keep it's fingers out of the 'free market'. Psystar would get to continue as it is doing now.
And that would be violating lic agreements? Yes that will turn out well.
No one forced Apple to sell their OS divorced of their machines. They decided to do that to cash in on the lucrative market of OS upgrades.
If they don't want people installing their OS on 'unapproved' machines, they have a simple and clear course to follow, don't sell the OS without a machine.
well that's what they are trying to do with the lic. So how exactly would they enforce what you reccomend any other way? Put hardware DRM in the machines or something? Why make it more complicated if the net outcome is supposed to be the same: Apple software is to be run on apple machines only.
If Psystar want's to compete, let them compete. Apple competes by creating products, Psystar is simply riding their coat tails. The government forcing a company to operate in areas they deem unprofitable is not fair competition in the marketplace.
exactly. meddling in the market makes it unfair not more fair. Apple is only a 10% player in the computer market so their bussiness model is not in restraint of trade for computers.
Apple should form a "discount buyers club". To belong to the club you have to buy an apple computer. Then you get 90% discounts on the operating system updates priced at $1000 retail.
This is going to be great for power users--the kind that read slashdot.
Why? chances are you want to use Linux or a mac but you can't because the typical user has a handful of application that
1) they have to run concurrently
2) that require windows.
For example, a lot of people MUST use windows (or a mac) because they have no alternative to running Word or Excell or some enterprise app.
but really just how many apps require MS?
the thing keeping virtualization from taking off is that windows is not cheap. But with a starter edition it could be made cheap.
run sun's virtual box. then you can run windows and linux seamlessly at the same time. FOr the aplications that require windows you use windows.
this would probably work out well.
However it won't actually work for the low end user. The lowend user is not going to have the sophistication to run two operating systems.
It may work out however for the high enduser that has the savy and extra computer resources needed to virtualize
I learned a lot about math reading martin gardiner's math columns and books.
Articles that I edit on wikipedia get flagged as being arguments because I usually edit them from both my home and work computers. as a reult when I am in a mood to edit there is rapid fire changes from multiple IP addresses. I see warnings when I log in that it looks like I'm in a dispute and I may be banned if further revisions occur.
That makes no sense at all. First all you are saying is that lowest order state of the vortex has 4 modes. But Why can't I have folds on the vortex, just as one can have folds in a magnetic bubble, to make higher order states? e.g. instead of having a pair of dipoles one had a pair quadrupoles.
As for them being smaller than bubbles, I'm not sure how you know this. For example, vertical storage in harddisks (akin to bubbles) is denser than longitudunal storage (akin to vorticies).
Relatively simple bots access a few URLs or an IRC channel, but many are more sophisticated than that these days, unfortunately. One strategy is to have a complex URL generator that deterministically spews out a couple of hundred http://fri4eie943kejkz.com/ garbage addresses per day, the botnet herder need only register one of them to deliver updates etc. Of course the algorithm can be reversed by sufficiently good analysts, so the next level up is for the botnet to form its own p2p network. Some of these are advanced, fully distributed systems employing encryption, automatic command and control failover (no central point of failure), "fast flux" DNS to present a constantly moving target etc. They are basically impossible to shut down, even if the legal will to do so across borders existed.
Exactly. So if you have a bot in captivity you see what addresses of the day it is going to.
Any computer that visits one of these gets flagged as infected.
No uninfected computer would visit any of them let alone all of them.
You could even push this up a level and simply looks for large numbers of DNS requests by different computers for the same invalid addresses. one could imagine that a mispublished URL could get a lot of legitimate computers making a bugus DNS request but if unrelated computers make the same 100 requests it seems pretty clear you could flag this.
or Quidich
Their is an apocryphal story that the soviets invested heavily in ternary logic and it was physically to hard to implement that it set them back a decade.
At the time, most memory was static memory which draws a current even in the quiescent state. it's easy to think about binary currents, they go one way or the other. What's a trinary current?
Much much later on memory went to charge storage (dynamic memory). This only drew current during switching but none when it was quiescent.
This memory stored levels of charge. You could imaging this might be much easier to implement multiple bits. However, then you would have had to have some way of modulating the amount of charge delivered instead of just opening a gate and letting the capacitor fully charge. In most cases the obvious idea of reverse polarizing the capacitor would make no sense from the point of view of the transitors unidirectionality.
so trinary logic never made any hardware sense.
in the physical world where we have X and Y and sometimes Z, all the modes tend to be multiples of 2 naturally (+/-x +/-y +/i z).
trinary logic makes little practical sense.
you just use one of the magnetic mirrors (slashdot a few days ago) that creates a monopole field. The tornadoes will be repelled by the induced image monopoles.
This sounds a lot like magnetic bubble memory that intel, fujitsu, IMB and TI made in the 1980s.
That too had multiple states per "bubble". However the higher-order bubbles were generally not used. The reason was, it was hard enough keeping the single bit (zeroth order mode) bubbles stable at high circulation and high density.
Since here the domains are fixed and the disk moves it might be easier to use higher order magnetic domain modes.
The "good" spam is sort of like a public education campaign about STDs. It's part of a well rounded solution in raising public awareness. Your's may not need raising but you will benefit if the awareness of others' is raised so put up with it.
Now then there's the post infection detection problem. We could take a simmilar approach of turning a bad thing to our advantage. Presumably these Zombie bots try to hit a series of predefined URLS to announce their availability. Once some of those are known, when not sieze them and use them to get infected computers to self-identify then notify the owners or if unresponsive their ISPs?
That would not cure all infection. But there is a well known principal in medial virus infection called the R-factor and that is the minimum number of infections needed in a population before the disease becomes self sustaining or growing in infections. We don't have to eliminate all zombies before we reach a point where the infection rate is highly damped.
that's got to be sacrilege?
where?
it's fear. If tens of million of people can't watch TV for a week, there's going to be a lot of grumpy people. I suspect that some people won't even be able to sleep without their before bedtime TV ritual.
Just like when there's a black out and there's increase rioting there will be people milling around with nothing to do looking for trouble.
Yes a few "enlightened" individuals will have a rebirth as they discover life without TV. I predict a raft of books on the topic of self actualization in 6 months.
But a much large set will not take it well I think.
Then of course there's the simple logistics of how you stock and sell that many flat screen TVs. I suspect this is non-trivial. There just are not that many unhelpful sales clerks to go around, let alone to process the returns when people find a better buy the next week.
Don't say cable cause there are even less cable instalers and they are even less helpful.
plus think of your broadband when everyone on your block gets cable plus internet.
there will be price gouging. etc...
a staged transition sounds sensible to me.