So, it's being hacked because Vista is booted from within some sort of VM? That doesn't sound like too much of a threat to machines. A threat to DRM, maybe.
Most DVD extractors strip the CSS DRM off of DVDs, leaving behind a huge disk image of.VOB files. VOB is the MPEG-2 container format, which holds MPEG-2 video multiplexed with AC3 audio.
Just as raw AIFF audio on CD is ripped to compressed MP3s, once the DRM is stripped from DVDs, they need further compression in order to take less space. Unfortunately, a poor choice of codecs was made.
Hackers cracked Microsoft's Windows Media V3 format, which was an "embraced and extended" variant of MPEG-4 that--unsurprisingly--wasn't compatible or compliant with anyone else's MPEG-4.
Microsoft intended V3 to use its new ASF container exclusively, but hackers simply dumped a data stream from a copy of the V3 codec into the older, obsolete AVI container instead.
The result was given the name DivX, as a joke on DIVX, the ill fated attempt by Circuit City to offer exploding DVD rentals. XviD is a fork from DivX which uses the same underlying technology.
Most of the world's pirate movies are in a DivX-related format, using the cloned version of Microsoft's tainted MPEG-4. Since then, Microsoft has delivered successive versions of its video codec under the name VC-1, and thoughtfully offers this as an alternative to standard MPEG-4.
Will the Real MPEG-4 Please Stand Up Apple meanwhile, pushes for standard MPEG-4 containers and formats, which means the.mp4 container file, the H.264 Advanced Video Codec, and the Advanced Audio Codec. Apple unsurprisingly sells content in iTunes using these formats, and delivers professional and consumer tools to create and process those formats.
The problem that exists for bootleg content ripped from DVDs is that it's stuck in a conundrum of messy crap: it's DVD MPEG-2 / AC3 content ripped into the DivX clone of the nonstandard, proprietary V3 video codec and dumped into an archaic AVI container format. Bleah!
Pirates are now annoyed that Apple doesn't work to reverse engineer this mess for optimum playback. Perhaps instead of ripping off Microsoft's junk, hackers should use industry standards and develop more elegant and modern techniques.
No, of course not. Did the MacBook Pro kill the MacBook? Did the PowerMac kill off the iMac? WIll a $500 iPhone kill the $99 iPod shuffle? No, but it may eat into the sales of the lower-end model.
Almost four years later, the file-sharing population has continued to grow, while CD sales continue to fall. Digital music sales have grown since their introduction, yet have failed to make up for the loss in sales
Is this true? Does anyone have sales or statistics?
So block the class C's. Things like Myspace Bypass are not your problem, the average user probably won't know about that. At a certain point, you'll find a user who will just run an SSH proxy, and is it really worth the hassle for locking out the more advanced users like that?
" Steve Jobs (whose company makes the most DRM-fucked up mp3 player in the world"
No my friend, that may be the Zune. It won't play Microsoft's previous DRMed "plays for sure" tracks, and adds DRM to any audio file you "squirt," even CC content.
9:5- "Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful."
This applies to the Pagans of Mecca, who kept attacking the Muslims. It does not apply to Christians and Jews, because they are referred to by name in the Quran elsewhere, not as "idolators" ('muskrikeen' in the Quran)
"It does suggest you wait around for their infinite punishment and pain to start, rather than nudging it in that direction."
I don't get what you mean. Muslims have tried explaining their religion to others and calling others to join them, but God made it clear in the Quran that forcible conversion is a sin (2:256) and not accepted. If you're unhappy that God said He will punish the unbelievers, well, take it up with Him and not me.
Straw man. Where do you hear that the majority of Muslims want Sharia? And what makes you think Sharia = stoning? You're wrong on both counts. 90% of Arabs in a survey said democracy was "a good thing," and Malaysia's interpretation of Sharia, for example, does not include stoning.
Understandable to think that, but not really true. The Quran refers to Christians as "Nasara" or part of the People of the Book (ahl ul-kitab), because they share much of the scripture and also worship the same God. The Quran refers to polytheists as "mushrikeen" (associators) and that's mainly directed at the pagans of Mecca and Medina who worshipped idols. There's quite a big difference in the Quran in distinction, so these videos are quite incorrect in their accusations.
The impression I'm developing of it is that it is concerned very much with the concept of justice as conceived of in the 7th century in that part of the world. So far I haven't come across any equivalent of the Sermon on the Mount, or 'love thy enemy, turn the other cheek' type stuff.
That's in the Quran as well, but if you want a more thorough and vivid depiction of that, you'll have to learn about the Sunnah; the example and life of the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, as well as the hadith, which are his quotations. There's lots of mercy in the Quran; good deeds get a 10x bonus, while bad deeds are unchanged, God gives you senses and knowledge as well as rain and food, etc. The Muslims were harassed and beaten and tortured for decades, and told to adopt a "turn the other cheek" sort of strategy. Only after 14 years were they allowed to fight back, in the Battle of Badr. If you read more of the Sunnah, you'll see a lot more about the kindness and mercy, and it clarifies some of the ambiguities. There's a number of books and biographies out there, try to find one with a Muslim author.
Further, those who deify Jesus are accused by the Koran of making "Partners unto Allah" -- beyond idolatry this is blasphemy. Both are punishable by death. A quick read of the Koran would answer these questions for you.
Actually, that's not how it goes. The Quran is strongly against idolatry and deifying Jesus, peace be upon him. However, it does not say to kill those who do that. India was ruled by Muslims for centuries, but the country is 85% Hindu today (they didn't kill all the idolators), and Muslims ruled over Christians for millenia without much fuss in much of the world. There's been some fighting in places like Nigeria, but that's the exception rather than the rule.
There are pretty clear proclamations that those who don't follow Allah are to die just as those who don't follow Christ should be burned or "brought here" and kill them.
I call straw man. Where in the Quran does it say to kill those who don't believe? Mecca once had a majority non-Muslim population while the Muslims ruled, and there was no forcible conversion.
Maybe the abortion clinic was a bad example, but how about Abu Ghraib, where they were forced to pray to Jesus while being beaten? I mean, some evangelicals ran the place (There's better evidence if you read the testimony from the victims, they were forced to say "F**k Allah" and "Help me Jesus" or else they were beaten by Charles Grainer. It's in PDF form somewhere on the web). How about the Christian soldiers who shoot Iraqis while saying it's what God wants?
Isolated incidents, and regrettable ones at that. The religion does not command mass murder, nor destruction of synagogues, both of which scholars of the Quran condemn as un-Islamic. Besides, the destruction of a synagogue in Egypt in the year 1014 does not mean that all Muslims believe in that. Look at how much violence is done in the name of every other religion, does that mean it's supported by it?
jihadunspun, a right-wing site, is disregarded by most Muslims. They're incorrect. Forcible conversion is NOT allowed in Islam, since the Quran says "Let there be no compulsion in religion" (2:256). God does not accept insincere conversions, so forced ones do not count.
Besides, India was ruled by Muslims for centuries, but is 85% Hindu today. No mass-forcible conversion ever took place. Spain was ruled by Moors (Muslims) for 700 years, yet allowed Jewish people greater freedom of religion than Christian Europe did, giving them synagogues and allowing them in university. It was known as the "Golden Age of Judaism" by historians, and only ended when the Spanish Inquisition kicked both Jews and Muslims out of Spain. Indonesia is the largest Muslim country in the world, and no Arab or Muslim army ever reached it, the millions converted through non-violence and missionaries and trading with Muslims.
The terrorists are pretty bad in a lot of ways, but they're not demanding conversion or death. Don't forget how they killed hundreds of Muslims on 9/11.
Let's hope it's better than Islam's "solution" for infidels
What, allowing them freedom to practice their own religion and protection by the Islamic government? Even Iran lets the Jewish MPs in office, and swear on the torah or bible.
Antitrust trial, they were caught in perjury; trying to lie under oath how IE cannot be removed from Windows.
Unethical business practices to crush competition: Purposely patching windows to break quicktime compatibility, trying to kill competition instead of compete with it (ie, in AOL meeting "How much do we need to pay you to screw Netscape?")
Stealing ideas and technology from Apple. Apple sued for having parts of their GUI patents stolen, but lost the case.
Lobbying tantamount to outright bribery: Under Clinton, the Federal judge ordered Microsoft split for its antitrust violations. When Bush was elected (who publicly opposed the measure in his campaign), the appeals judge in a surprise move threw out the verdict.
Both of those countries are not run by radical muslims. They both had female prime ministers, and Bangladesh still has one today. Not very radical, is it? Also, Pakistan's government supported the war on Afghanistan.
Saying that doing business in Pakistan is supporting terrorists is like saying doing business in America is supporting wars.
Slashdot Mirror
It glides as softly as a cloud!
Partition the drives, run Ghost on the Windows portion, and Carbon Copy Cloner on the Mac portion.
So, it's being hacked because Vista is booted from within some sort of VM? That doesn't sound like too much of a threat to machines. A threat to DRM, maybe.
Is this Apple's fault? Aren't they constrained by copyright laws and the record labels for each country? (which is why they made separate stores).
Neither article says how they did it. I'm assuming they did a simple titration, like undergraduate General Chemistry teaches?
No, of course not. Did the MacBook Pro kill the MacBook? Did the PowerMac kill off the iMac? WIll a $500 iPhone kill the $99 iPod shuffle? No, but it may eat into the sales of the lower-end model.
Sheesh, this is a no-brainer.
Is this true? Does anyone have sales or statistics?
So block the class C's. Things like Myspace Bypass are not your problem, the average user probably won't know about that. At a certain point, you'll find a user who will just run an SSH proxy, and is it really worth the hassle for locking out the more advanced users like that?
" Steve Jobs (whose company makes the most DRM-fucked up mp3 player in the world"
No my friend, that may be the Zune. It won't play Microsoft's previous DRMed "plays for sure" tracks, and adds DRM to any audio file you "squirt," even CC content.
9:5- "Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful."
This applies to the Pagans of Mecca, who kept attacking the Muslims. It does not apply to Christians and Jews, because they are referred to by name in the Quran elsewhere, not as "idolators" ('muskrikeen' in the Quran)
"It does suggest you wait around for their infinite punishment and pain to start, rather than nudging it in that direction."
I don't get what you mean. Muslims have tried explaining their religion to others and calling others to join them, but God made it clear in the Quran that forcible conversion is a sin (2:256) and not accepted. If you're unhappy that God said He will punish the unbelievers, well, take it up with Him and not me.
Straw man. Where do you hear that the majority of Muslims want Sharia? And what makes you think Sharia = stoning? You're wrong on both counts. 90% of Arabs in a survey said democracy was "a good thing," and Malaysia's interpretation of Sharia, for example, does not include stoning.
Understandable to think that, but not really true. The Quran refers to Christians as "Nasara" or part of the People of the Book (ahl ul-kitab), because they share much of the scripture and also worship the same God. The Quran refers to polytheists as "mushrikeen" (associators) and that's mainly directed at the pagans of Mecca and Medina who worshipped idols. There's quite a big difference in the Quran in distinction, so these videos are quite incorrect in their accusations.
The impression I'm developing of it is that it is concerned very much with the concept of justice as conceived of in the 7th century in that part of the world. So far I haven't come across any equivalent of the Sermon on the Mount, or 'love thy enemy, turn the other cheek' type stuff.
That's in the Quran as well, but if you want a more thorough and vivid depiction of that, you'll have to learn about the Sunnah; the example and life of the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, as well as the hadith, which are his quotations. There's lots of mercy in the Quran; good deeds get a 10x bonus, while bad deeds are unchanged, God gives you senses and knowledge as well as rain and food, etc. The Muslims were harassed and beaten and tortured for decades, and told to adopt a "turn the other cheek" sort of strategy. Only after 14 years were they allowed to fight back, in the Battle of Badr. If you read more of the Sunnah, you'll see a lot more about the kindness and mercy, and it clarifies some of the ambiguities. There's a number of books and biographies out there, try to find one with a Muslim author.
Further, those who deify Jesus are accused by the Koran of making "Partners unto Allah" -- beyond idolatry this is blasphemy. Both are punishable by death. A quick read of the Koran would answer these questions for you.
Actually, that's not how it goes. The Quran is strongly against idolatry and deifying Jesus, peace be upon him. However, it does not say to kill those who do that. India was ruled by Muslims for centuries, but the country is 85% Hindu today (they didn't kill all the idolators), and Muslims ruled over Christians for millenia without much fuss in much of the world. There's been some fighting in places like Nigeria, but that's the exception rather than the rule.
There are pretty clear proclamations that those who don't follow Allah are to die just as those who don't follow Christ should be burned or "brought here" and kill them.
I call straw man. Where in the Quran does it say to kill those who don't believe? Mecca once had a majority non-Muslim population while the Muslims ruled, and there was no forcible conversion.
Maybe the abortion clinic was a bad example, but how about Abu Ghraib, where they were forced to pray to Jesus while being beaten? I mean, some evangelicals ran the place (There's better evidence if you read the testimony from the victims, they were forced to say "F**k Allah" and "Help me Jesus" or else they were beaten by Charles Grainer. It's in PDF form somewhere on the web). How about the Christian soldiers who shoot Iraqis while saying it's what God wants?
China used to behead drivers who broke the traffic laws, and displayed them in the city center. It cut back on car accidents and infractions.
A little drastic, don't you think?
Isolated incidents, and regrettable ones at that. The religion does not command mass murder, nor destruction of synagogues, both of which scholars of the Quran condemn as un-Islamic. Besides, the destruction of a synagogue in Egypt in the year 1014 does not mean that all Muslims believe in that. Look at how much violence is done in the name of every other religion, does that mean it's supported by it?
jihadunspun, a right-wing site, is disregarded by most Muslims. They're incorrect. Forcible conversion is NOT allowed in Islam, since the Quran says "Let there be no compulsion in religion" (2:256). God does not accept insincere conversions, so forced ones do not count.
Besides, India was ruled by Muslims for centuries, but is 85% Hindu today. No mass-forcible conversion ever took place. Spain was ruled by Moors (Muslims) for 700 years, yet allowed Jewish people greater freedom of religion than Christian Europe did, giving them synagogues and allowing them in university. It was known as the "Golden Age of Judaism" by historians, and only ended when the Spanish Inquisition kicked both Jews and Muslims out of Spain. Indonesia is the largest Muslim country in the world, and no Arab or Muslim army ever reached it, the millions converted through non-violence and missionaries and trading with Muslims.
The terrorists are pretty bad in a lot of ways, but they're not demanding conversion or death. Don't forget how they killed hundreds of Muslims on 9/11.
What, allowing them freedom to practice their own religion and protection by the Islamic government? Even Iran lets the Jewish MPs in office, and swear on the torah or bible.
Quit your FUD.
I call non sequitar on you. As the parent was pointin gout, things evolve in common to the ecosystem, like eyes.
"For all practical purposes you can expect no 3rd party apps."
Apple has been selling iPod games made by third parties. It's not inconceivable they'd do the same for the iPhone.
Icom is a popular marine radio and handheld company. The name is taken
Antitrust trial, they were caught in perjury; trying to lie under oath how IE cannot be removed from Windows.
Unethical business practices to crush competition: Purposely patching windows to break quicktime compatibility, trying to kill competition instead of compete with it (ie, in AOL meeting "How much do we need to pay you to screw Netscape?")
Stealing ideas and technology from Apple. Apple sued for having parts of their GUI patents stolen, but lost the case.
Lobbying tantamount to outright bribery: Under Clinton, the Federal judge ordered Microsoft split for its antitrust violations. When Bush was elected (who publicly opposed the measure in his campaign), the appeals judge in a surprise move threw out the verdict.
I think you're a troll, but anyways...
Both of those countries are not run by radical muslims. They both had female prime ministers, and Bangladesh still has one today. Not very radical, is it? Also, Pakistan's government supported the war on Afghanistan.
Saying that doing business in Pakistan is supporting terrorists is like saying doing business in America is supporting wars.