There are a few possible explanations for this rather odd driver situation...
I know this is rumor-mongering, but I can't help but notice that the *Windows* drivers dont' perform such a check, and neither do the Linux Retail drivers...
Consider this: Microsoft or some other party requests unofficially that ATi *not* support Linux in its OEM hardware, just for the sake of not having OEM desktop vidcard support for Linux...this could explain things like the OEM/Retail check that occurs in Linux, but not Windows.
Interesting stuff..I want to see what ATI's reaction on this is.
The Register carried this article a week ago. I find it rather funny that something of so much/. interest, which I happen to know was submitted by at least 2 people and never covered, is only seeing the light of day now that a crypto site covered it.
Also people, let's note that in the original story, it wasn't a single Microsoft employee who submitted the paper, it was apparently one of MS's research teams that came to these findings
Lastly, it's kind of cute that the paper itself presents an opportunity for Palladium to be useful: a medium where the content producers feel safe enough to release their media..
Let's keep these comments as deep as:
-the movie is quite entertaining
-the CG was well-integrated with the live-action
-it leaves a nice feeling in you when you leave
Claiming that the movie is a fraud because the main character isn't as bad-ass as the movie makes him out to be is pointless really.
Now, if you had claimed that the *author* was a fraud (albeit talented one) for stealing the character "Larry Potter" from a friend of hers (admittantly, she did create the whole storyline and only ripped the names) then your post might have some value.
I agree whole-heartedly with the first of 2 non-superfluous statements the author makes:
Why do you think Java and, to a lesser extent, C# are so popular right now? ESPECIALLY for teaching? Because with Java and C#, it's very, very hard to write code that can break the system it's running on.
I also agree to some extent with his position on cyptography...most serious (non-IE/Outlook) insecurities aren't based on cracked crypto - they're in buffer overflows, and weak points in code.
I don't pretend to be anything but a pathetic first year java student, but I can see where this author is coming from just be reading this website once a week...
It's a *WELL* publicized fact that laptops use power management in order to extend battery life. I mean, people deliberately go out and buy ultra-low voltage P3s with speedstep because they need the battery life...
Besides, it's pretty well known that *most* laptop action occurs in the *indoors* near "power outlets".
Dude, the parts you're looking for just don't COME in the retail channels these days. I've seen modjobs where Mac enclosures have been used to house PCs (Rotten Apple is a good example), and others, such as the G4 heatsink that was scavenged in order to make a lowend P3 heatsink.
The tough part about building a Mac is Apple itself - they are the ONLY supplier of Macs or Mac parts, and they want it to stay that way. Why do you think Jobs got rid of the cloners?
when, oh god when, will it be possible to just open up a little window and change your refresh rate, display adaptor settings, etc, in linux, right from the start? I mean, c'mon, *windows* has it...
Ok, I'm willing to admit I'm incorrect on this. Thinking about it, it's true that websites can be designed in a way that would allow text readers to interface with them.
Not to whine or anything, but in/. we endlessly debate such things as CLIs and GUIs. PCs use human interfaces primarily based on hand-eye coordination. Accessibility? PFFT. There are some things that you simply can't do without your most primary of senses, vision. Can you play hockey blind? Didn't think so. Can you go to a ballpark and watch a baseball game? Didn't think so. I mean, blind people are *CRIPPLED*. Not "special needs", they're just *crippled*. When websites are sued for not being accessible to the blind, I just laugh my ass off. I mean seriously, a blind person can't even read a screen, yet this blind person complains when her or she can't surf the web? That's like complaining about being unable to drive. Web surfing is an act that blind people simply aren't capable of performing.
God, if this trend of politically correct stupidity continues, we will have porn sued for not having female curves that are readable in braille.
Blind people can lead rich, full lives. - in environments that don't require a dependancy on EYESIGHT. The net IS one of those environments.
The legality of xbox mod chips is ambiguous at best. Perhaps no crimes are committed in the production or installation of them, but consider that most users would utilize their modchip to play copied games or ROMs or Linux, etc. Xbox is sold at a loss.Microsoft needs to sell games for the xbox in order to recoup the losses it incurs for every unit sold.An easily accessible modchip that allows for people to NOT need to buy games for their xbox is a bad thing. Atleast for Microsoft.
Well it seems we've already taken the article out...does anyone here find it funny that the generally anti-microsoft readership of slashdot overloaded a piece of microsoft news coverage?
"Comments that looked like they were from Pat Moorhead on an Aussie Web site are not from Pat Moorhead, the firm has just told us. In fact, according to an AMD UK representative, AMD's Opteron products will run any kind of content in the future -- contrary to the report in The Age, on which our original report, below, was based.
Part of the content in The Age failed to distinguish between comments Moorhead made and conjecture, AMD said.
AMD, in fact, claims it is the "good guy", and even though it is a member of the "trusted computing" initiative, will allow users to opt in whether to use this type of technology or not.
"There is nothing [in Hammer] that could actually prevent a user running unlicensed content," the representative from AMD said."
Make damn sure to check the most current of facts before posting FUD, fellow/.ers?
Too many languages. C#, C++, Object Oriented C, Java, Python, Perl, C, etc etc. Besides, why teach C# to students who don't understand the fundamentals of C?
Here's the deal: If you don't have to pay for it, you won't. And if you don't have to pay for an inferior version, then you will get the freebie and skip the superior one.
Photographers know this. It's fundamentally the same as the MP3 craze. What would you rather have, free low-quality MP3 format songs or high fidelity CD audio for $15 per album? Too many people choose the freebie, and thus less money to those who produce the content.
When you hire a photographer to take pictures, you are paying them for 2 services: 1-their time and effort. 2-whatever photographs you eventually decide to purchase. A professional photographer cannot hope to make a living on only the labor fee. Thus, photographers are beginning to limit the availability of proofs. Photography is a profession from the time when it took a hell of a lot of skill and experience to "capture the moment". Now, in an age where we have a cheap and inferior substitute to "analog" photography, the profession is finding itself in a vulnerable position.
10 years ago when you hired a photographer and bought prints, you were effectively buying a service and product that could not be easily or cheaply reproduced. In effect you weren't buying the rights to the picture itself, but a copy of the picture. Nowadays, you are still in spirit buying the printed photo itself, but you now have the power to copy them as much as you please, almost for free. How can artists compete with that? By A: charging more and B: limiting your ability to make high-res copies of THEIR artwork.
I also take offense to the comparison of "closed/open source" with the photographic medium. The primary positive philosophy behind open-source development is that when the original data is open to view and modification, it can be IMPROVED by the author's peers. This is completely at odds with the digital photography issue. The original data (the negatives/proofs) of a photo session can't be openly analyzed and improved by the photographer's peers. It can only be freely copied by the user.
IMO, this is a decently written, but very misguided commentary. You don't pay artists for all rights to a picture. You pay them for the limited quantity of paper images you receive. Hell, I guess you could buy the rights to the initial image, but if this were to become the case in the future, expect professional photos and negatives to cost much, much more.
It's easier to target P2P users than the thief. Actual investigating would determine where the leak came from ---all you have to do is a kazaa search to find the pirating users...
And we wonder why the RIAA and MPAA are screaming at their senators to kill P2P systems?
Movies have always partially made it into the Internet before they were released, but only now with the relative ease of file-swapping have they been so readily pirated.
If we want to convince *anyone* of the legitimacy of P2P networks bull**** like this has to stop, now.
Any computer user worth their salt can build an AMD or an Intel system. I have built P2/P3/P4/Athlon/Athlon(socketA)/AthlonXP systems, and I got each one with my first try. I avoid VIA motherboards and use *COMMON SENSE* and I have done very well.
Anyone who whines about instability in computer components these days doesn't know WTF they are doing. Except for maybe VIA errata;)
If what you say is implemented, then it will be the simple i386 instruction set used for all benchmark programs. This would be utterly useless, as benchmarks are written to simulate REAL LIFE performance. And considering that intense programs are written to utilize every last ounce of performance from the 2 main PC processor types, a simple common codebase would ruin a benchmark program. P4s run Quake3 faster because they're OPTIMIZED for the kind of chores Q3 puts a processor through. Athlons run most office apps faster because they have a great branch prediction unit.
When measuring performance, i386 is a joke. SSE1/2, 3DNow!, enhanced FPUs, etc, these are where performance lies...
Slashdot Mirror
Lexx.
It's sexy.
It's weird.
It has characters I love to hate. (Prince, 790)
It has characters I despise but cheer on (Stanley!).
It has characters I want to ogle (Xev).
It's epic (C'mon, lexx = biggest weapon of destruction ever built?
The whole initial plot is serendipity so severe that it can only be called extremely dumb luck that the heroes can find themselves in such roles.
Oh,and it doesn't have omnipresent use of special effects.
Vaiyo A-O
A Home Va Ya Ray
Vaiyo A-Rah
Jerhume Brunnen G!
I was admiring it until I saw at the bottom of the page: "created using a mac"
Now I just sit back and wonder: Wow...Macs are good! I'm gonna get myself a duallie G4 and see if it can make me a Borg Cube!
There are a few possible explanations for this rather odd driver situation...
I know this is rumor-mongering, but I can't help but notice that the *Windows* drivers dont' perform such a check, and neither do the Linux Retail drivers...
Consider this: Microsoft or some other party requests unofficially that ATi *not* support Linux in its OEM hardware, just for the sake of not having OEM desktop vidcard support for Linux...this could explain things like the OEM/Retail check that occurs in Linux, but not Windows. Interesting stuff..I want to see what ATI's reaction on this is.
is still a point sprite ;)
The Register carried this article a week ago. I find it rather funny that something of so much /. interest, which I happen to know was submitted by at least 2 people and never covered, is only seeing the light of day now that a crypto site covered it.
Also people, let's note that in the original story, it wasn't a single Microsoft employee who submitted the paper, it was apparently one of MS's research teams that came to these findings
Lastly, it's kind of cute that the paper itself presents an opportunity for Palladium to be useful: a medium where the content producers feel safe enough to release their media..
Let's keep these comments as deep as: -the movie is quite entertaining -the CG was well-integrated with the live-action -it leaves a nice feeling in you when you leave Claiming that the movie is a fraud because the main character isn't as bad-ass as the movie makes him out to be is pointless really. Now, if you had claimed that the *author* was a fraud (albeit talented one) for stealing the character "Larry Potter" from a friend of hers (admittantly, she did create the whole storyline and only ripped the names) then your post might have some value.
Are we going to be victimized on the price of this series just like when STNG came out on DVD?
I agree whole-heartedly with the first of 2 non-superfluous statements the author makes: Why do you think Java and, to a lesser extent, C# are so popular right now? ESPECIALLY for teaching? Because with Java and C#, it's very, very hard to write code that can break the system it's running on. I also agree to some extent with his position on cyptography...most serious (non-IE/Outlook) insecurities aren't based on cracked crypto - they're in buffer overflows, and weak points in code. I don't pretend to be anything but a pathetic first year java student, but I can see where this author is coming from just be reading this website once a week...
It's a *WELL* publicized fact that laptops use power management in order to extend battery life. I mean, people deliberately go out and buy ultra-low voltage P3s with speedstep because they need the battery life...
Besides, it's pretty well known that *most* laptop action occurs in the *indoors* near "power outlets".
Dude, the parts you're looking for just don't COME in the retail channels these days. I've seen modjobs where Mac enclosures have been used to house PCs (Rotten Apple is a good example), and others, such as the G4 heatsink that was scavenged in order to make a lowend P3 heatsink.
The tough part about building a Mac is Apple itself - they are the ONLY supplier of Macs or Mac parts, and they want it to stay that way. Why do you think Jobs got rid of the cloners?
when, oh god when, will it be possible to just open up a little window and change your refresh rate, display adaptor settings, etc, in linux, right from the start? I mean, c'mon, *windows* has it...
Ok, I'm willing to admit I'm incorrect on this. Thinking about it, it's true that websites can be designed in a way that would allow text readers to interface with them.
Not to whine or anything, but in /. we endlessly debate such things as CLIs and GUIs. PCs use human interfaces primarily based on hand-eye coordination. Accessibility? PFFT. There are some things that you simply can't do without your most primary of senses, vision. Can you play hockey blind? Didn't think so. Can you go to a ballpark and watch a baseball game? Didn't think so. I mean, blind people are *CRIPPLED*. Not "special needs", they're just *crippled*. When websites are sued for not being accessible to the blind, I just laugh my ass off. I mean seriously, a blind person can't even read a screen, yet this blind person complains when her or she can't surf the web? That's like complaining about being unable to drive. Web surfing is an act that blind people simply aren't capable of performing.
God, if this trend of politically correct stupidity continues, we will have porn sued for not having female curves that are readable in braille.
Blind people can lead rich, full lives. - in environments that don't require a dependancy on EYESIGHT. The net IS one of those environments.
The legality of xbox mod chips is ambiguous at best. Perhaps no crimes are committed in the production or installation of them, but consider that most users would utilize their modchip to play copied games or ROMs or Linux, etc. Xbox is sold at a loss.Microsoft needs to sell games for the xbox in order to recoup the losses it incurs for every unit sold.An easily accessible modchip that allows for people to NOT need to buy games for their xbox is a bad thing. Atleast for Microsoft.
Well it seems we've already taken the article out...does anyone here find it funny that the generally anti-microsoft readership of slashdot overloaded a piece of microsoft news coverage?
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=5489
/.ers?
"Comments that looked like they were from Pat Moorhead on an Aussie Web site are not from Pat Moorhead, the firm has just told us.
In fact, according to an AMD UK representative, AMD's Opteron products will run any kind of content in the future -- contrary to the report in The Age, on which our original report, below, was based.
Part of the content in The Age failed to distinguish between comments Moorhead made and conjecture, AMD said.
AMD, in fact, claims it is the "good guy", and even though it is a member of the "trusted computing" initiative, will allow users to opt in whether to use this type of technology or not.
"There is nothing [in Hammer] that could actually prevent a user running unlicensed content," the representative from AMD said."
Make damn sure to check the most current of facts before posting FUD, fellow
Anyone see the embedded Windows .NET ad in the full story page of this article..?
Too many languages. C#, C++, Object Oriented C, Java, Python, Perl, C, etc etc. Besides, why teach C# to students who don't understand the fundamentals of C?
Here's the deal: If you don't have to pay for it, you won't. And if you don't have to pay for an inferior version, then you will get the freebie and skip the superior one.
Photographers know this. It's fundamentally the same as the MP3 craze. What would you rather have, free low-quality MP3 format songs or high fidelity CD audio for $15 per album? Too many people choose the freebie, and thus less money to those who produce the content.
When you hire a photographer to take pictures, you are paying them for 2 services: 1-their time and effort. 2-whatever photographs you eventually decide to purchase. A professional photographer cannot hope to make a living on only the labor fee. Thus, photographers are beginning to limit the availability of proofs. Photography is a profession from the time when it took a hell of a lot of skill and experience to "capture the moment". Now, in an age where we have a cheap and inferior substitute to "analog" photography, the profession is finding itself in a vulnerable position.
10 years ago when you hired a photographer and bought prints, you were effectively buying a service and product that could not be easily or cheaply reproduced. In effect you weren't buying the rights to the picture itself, but a copy of the picture. Nowadays, you are still in spirit buying the printed photo itself, but you now have the power to copy them as much as you please, almost for free. How can artists compete with that? By A: charging more and B: limiting your ability to make high-res copies of THEIR artwork.
I also take offense to the comparison of "closed/open source" with the photographic medium. The primary positive philosophy behind open-source development is that when the original data is open to view and modification, it can be IMPROVED by the author's peers. This is completely at odds with the digital photography issue. The original data (the negatives/proofs) of a photo session can't be openly analyzed and improved by the photographer's peers. It can only be freely copied by the user.
IMO, this is a decently written, but very misguided commentary. You don't pay artists for all rights to a picture. You pay them for the limited quantity of paper images you receive. Hell, I guess you could buy the rights to the initial image, but if this were to become the case in the future, expect professional photos and negatives to cost much, much more.
It's easier to target P2P users than the thief. Actual investigating would determine where the leak came from ---all you have to do is a kazaa search to find the pirating users...
And we wonder why the RIAA and MPAA are screaming at their senators to kill P2P systems? Movies have always partially made it into the Internet before they were released, but only now with the relative ease of file-swapping have they been so readily pirated. If we want to convince *anyone* of the legitimacy of P2P networks bull**** like this has to stop, now.
A blind man could hook those bionic eyes up to one of those Sony Glasstron sunglass-tv units playing some Spice Channel ;-)
Any computer user worth their salt can build an AMD or an Intel system. I have built P2/P3/P4/Athlon/Athlon(socketA)/AthlonXP systems, and I got each one with my first try. I avoid VIA motherboards and use *COMMON SENSE* and I have done very well. Anyone who whines about instability in computer components these days doesn't know WTF they are doing. Except for maybe VIA errata ;)
Benchmarking isn't about fairness. It's about being better than your competition, and more importantly, LOOKING better than the competition...
If what you say is implemented, then it will be the simple i386 instruction set used for all benchmark programs. This would be utterly useless, as benchmarks are written to simulate REAL LIFE performance. And considering that intense programs are written to utilize every last ounce of performance from the 2 main PC processor types, a simple common codebase would ruin a benchmark program. P4s run Quake3 faster because they're OPTIMIZED for the kind of chores Q3 puts a processor through. Athlons run most office apps faster because they have a great branch prediction unit. When measuring performance, i386 is a joke. SSE1/2, 3DNow!, enhanced FPUs, etc, these are where performance lies...