If you fail to comply with these requests, Blackboard will have no choice but to proceed in a manner appropriate to protect its valuable intellectual property rights.
Another problem is that major functionality is quite often rewritten from scratch. It's not unusual to see freshmeat announcements like "What's new: completely rewritten". Don't throw away all tested and working code and documentation to start all over again, introducing new bugs which annoy users and waste time.
Boy, if I didn't throw away and re-write stuff, it'd be even buggier and harder to maintain than it is. Sometimes I feel like my most productive programming days are the ones where I delete more lines of code than I write.
Privacy concerns aside, one thing that would be cool would be if I could call someone, and while talking to them, hit a button to send my location to their phone, so a little arrow could appear on their phone pointing to me.
That way my co-workers could actually end up eating lunch at the same restaurant.
Unless you are doing something
wrong, why does it matter that people can track you?
Because there are things which aren't illegal, but not the government's business. Suppose I'm married but carrying on a homosexual affair with my neighbor. Then suppose I'm an activist of some sort (pick your favorite cause for the sake of argument.)
What sort of temptation would this knowledge of my personal life present to someone in the government to whom I was causing trouble? I'm doing nothing illegal, but by finding out something that could be embarassing to me, they can abuse their power to gain extra-legal power over me, by threating to blackmail me.
For anyone who thinks this is an overly paranoid scenario over what the government would do, read about the information collected about civil rights activists in the 60's.
One point of face - the portion of DC that was on the Virginia side was ceded back to Virginia, and is now part of the city of Alexandria. All of DC is on the MD side of the Potomac.
That's true - it's just supposed to be the capital, the white house, and acres of farmland. Representatives aren't busy, I'm sure they can make their own pizza's, do their own surgeries on themselves, pave the roads for themselves, clean the capital building out themselves, act as their own security guards,...
The government could not function without residents on this piece of land. To make someone choose between full rights and economic opportunity is the antithesis of liberty.
I didn't know that part of the EULA was a Sun requirement. It certaintly looked odd when I read it. It is besides the point, however.
The point remains - a scary warning message can be a big deterant to using 'unapproved' software. Whether or not Microsoft gives approval easily or not, I have no idea. I am not saying they are abusing this. But the potential for abuse is certainly there, and the power of a scary warning message should not be underestimated.
It might work, but you will get one scary-ass warning from Windows. I installed a new ethernet card in an older system, and there was a slip of paper which showed the message that would pop up if installed on XP. I wish I could remember exactly what it said now, but it would certainly have made me think twice about the software.
Remember the EULA on windows from two years back? It said "This product cannot be used in life-critical applications, because it contains Java from Sun Microsystems." Don't underestimate the damage a sinister sounding warning message can cause.
It's only flamebait insofar as it says that if you use GPL software, you'd better check with your lawyers. But that standard click-through license? Pay it no mind, it won't hurt you!
I have an orange iMac, which we keep in a public room on the first floor (my wife checks email througout the day.) I actually really like the colored iMacs and the translucent sides. It goes well with the rest of our stuff. I suppose a completly non-descript computer would blend in, but how boring is that? If I pay over $500 for something, it might as well look interesting.
It's true that electromagnetic signals do not interfere with each other, but the long discourse in the article about that is pointless. I tend to think that is a problem with the reporter's understanding, not the professor's.
The problem is background noise. According to communications theory, the amount of information you can push through a channel is proportional to the frequency bandwidth and the signal to noise ratio. There are modulation schemes (Quadrature amplitude modulation, for example) which are designed to squeeze more information through a given bandwidth by taking advantage of a good signal to noise ratio.
Spread spectrum technololgy (which includes things like code division multiplexing and frequency hopping) follow these same rules, but with a wider bandwidth than a tradition radio or TV signal.
So I think this guys point is this - looking at the usable frequency spectrum (100 KHz to 100 GHz), and the noise distribution from background noise across this very wide band, are we putting as much information through as we can?
No, because we've divided up the frequency space solely based on frequency bandwidth, while ignoring the signal to noise ratio, which is inefficient. It's inefficient because everything must be designed around a worst-case background noise, without the ability to adjust when noise is less than this designed for worst case. It is also inefficent because some transmissions are not continuous, and when they are quiet, that portion of the usable spectrum is wasted.
The details of negotiated use of spectrum, spread spectrum usage, and other points are just expounding on the fundamental point - we have one big communications channel of radiated RF, and we are not coming close to using the full capacity of it because we are forcing a certain architecture on it by way of government regulation.
UV lasers can be bad, but they don't do retinal damage at short enough wavelengths. In fact, UV is used in "Laser Vision Correction", because it ablates the cornea nicely without penetrating at all into the retina.
For really severe retinal damage, visible and near IR are the worst.
The suit is being filed under the DMCA because they circumvented the sensor on the printer.
How the hell do these toner cartridges affect the printer manufacturer's copyright? DMCA is supposed to be about protecting so-called intellectual property. That clearly is NOT the use to which it is being put here.
What's next? My "Check Engine Soon" light will be programmed to come on from time to time and the on-board computer will make the car run badly until the proper "reset" signal is used? And don't try to figure out the reset code yourself - you'd be in violation of the DMCA!
I think you've hit on a very important point. As long as CD's had to be identical to be mass produced, there were technical restrictions tracking and copy inhibition. This allows all sorts of possibilities for tracking people's use of anything that comes on a CD - music, software, etc.
Re:What is an example that can't run in parallel?
on
Forget Moore's Law?
·
· Score: 1
but now you can calculate an individual digit
But only in base 16, not in base 10, at least as of a few years ago.
My understanding of the CD manufacturing process is that the aluminum is formed in a press, which allows you to quickly make zillions of identical copies, but does not let you make small variations in copies. (As opposed to, say, microprocessors, which all have small amounts of non-volatile memory which can be programmed.)
I believe this is why some software includes a key on a sticker that you have to type in. The CD will recognize a whole bunch of keys, but by entering the one on the sticker, you give your software an ID number.
This being said, I don't think we are in immediate danger of getting unique ID's on CDs. Unless someone knows if there's a manufacturing process for writing small amounts of data on a mass-produced CD?
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps not so valuable after all...
Like that damn florinated water supply!
Another problem is that major functionality is quite often rewritten from scratch. It's not unusual to see freshmeat announcements like "What's new: completely rewritten". Don't throw away all tested and working code and documentation to start all over again, introducing new bugs which annoy users and waste time.
Boy, if I didn't throw away and re-write stuff, it'd be even buggier and harder to maintain than it is. Sometimes I feel like my most productive programming days are the ones where I delete more lines of code than I write.
That way my co-workers could actually end up eating lunch at the same restaurant.
Because there are things which aren't illegal, but not the government's business. Suppose I'm married but carrying on a homosexual affair with my neighbor. Then suppose I'm an activist of some sort (pick your favorite cause for the sake of argument.)
What sort of temptation would this knowledge of my personal life present to someone in the government to whom I was causing trouble? I'm doing nothing illegal, but by finding out something that could be embarassing to me, they can abuse their power to gain extra-legal power over me, by threating to blackmail me.
For anyone who thinks this is an overly paranoid scenario over what the government would do, read about the information collected about civil rights activists in the 60's.
One point of face - the portion of DC that was on the Virginia side was ceded back to Virginia, and is now part of the city of Alexandria. All of DC is on the MD side of the Potomac.
That's true - it's just supposed to be the capital, the white house, and acres of farmland. Representatives aren't busy, I'm sure they can make their own pizza's, do their own surgeries on themselves, pave the roads for themselves, clean the capital building out themselves, act as their own security guards,...
The government could not function without residents on this piece of land. To make someone choose between full rights and economic opportunity is the antithesis of liberty.
The point remains - a scary warning message can be a big deterant to using 'unapproved' software. Whether or not Microsoft gives approval easily or not, I have no idea. I am not saying they are abusing this. But the potential for abuse is certainly there, and the power of a scary warning message should not be underestimated.
Remember the EULA on windows from two years back? It said "This product cannot be used in life-critical applications, because it contains Java from Sun Microsystems." Don't underestimate the damage a sinister sounding warning message can cause.
Of course, as long as you don't mind putting your future progeny's genetic material on and induction coil...
Hmm. Nevermind.
Perhaps because there is no provision to do this under U.S. law. We do not have a parlimentary system.
The problem is background noise. According to communications theory, the amount of information you can push through a channel is proportional to the frequency bandwidth and the signal to noise ratio. There are modulation schemes (Quadrature amplitude modulation, for example) which are designed to squeeze more information through a given bandwidth by taking advantage of a good signal to noise ratio.
Spread spectrum technololgy (which includes things like code division multiplexing and frequency hopping) follow these same rules, but with a wider bandwidth than a tradition radio or TV signal.
So I think this guys point is this - looking at the usable frequency spectrum (100 KHz to 100 GHz), and the noise distribution from background noise across this very wide band, are we putting as much information through as we can?
No, because we've divided up the frequency space solely based on frequency bandwidth, while ignoring the signal to noise ratio, which is inefficient. It's inefficient because everything must be designed around a worst-case background noise, without the ability to adjust when noise is less than this designed for worst case. It is also inefficent because some transmissions are not continuous, and when they are quiet, that portion of the usable spectrum is wasted.
The details of negotiated use of spectrum, spread spectrum usage, and other points are just expounding on the fundamental point - we have one big communications channel of radiated RF, and we are not coming close to using the full capacity of it because we are forcing a certain architecture on it by way of government regulation.
to those tags on matresses that say "do not remove under penalty of law"
UV lasers can be bad, but they don't do retinal damage at short enough wavelengths. In fact, UV is used in "Laser Vision Correction", because it ablates the cornea nicely without penetrating at all into the retina.
For really severe retinal damage, visible and near IR are the worst.
How the hell do these toner cartridges affect the printer manufacturer's copyright? DMCA is supposed to be about protecting so-called intellectual property. That clearly is NOT the use to which it is being put here.
What's next? My "Check Engine Soon" light will be programmed to come on from time to time and the on-board computer will make the car run badly until the proper "reset" signal is used? And don't try to figure out the reset code yourself - you'd be in violation of the DMCA!
I think you've hit on a very important point. As long as CD's had to be identical to be mass produced, there were technical restrictions tracking and copy inhibition. This allows all sorts of possibilities for tracking people's use of anything that comes on a CD - music, software, etc.
But only in base 16, not in base 10, at least as of a few years ago.
I believe this is why some software includes a key on a sticker that you have to type in. The CD will recognize a whole bunch of keys, but by entering the one on the sticker, you give your software an ID number.
This being said, I don't think we are in immediate danger of getting unique ID's on CDs. Unless someone knows if there's a manufacturing process for writing small amounts of data on a mass-produced CD?
You call yourself a geek? It's 3.1415926535...
2.7K, 5800K, what's a few thousand degrees between friends?
While it's not in thermal equilibrium, the spectrum is very close to a black body, especially at wavelengths longer than visible.