I know so many people who just pirate Photoshop so they can feel "pro" and use "the best" that it's not even funny. Get over it!
I had a friend that worked at adobe a few years ago that told me that they release 10-20 serial numbers into the wild for about all of their products so that kids resizing and cropping will choose their software. When the kids grow up, they'll know Photoshop/GoLive/Illustrator/whatever and will be more likley to purchase it or recommend it for purchase to their company. Nothing really lost as they wouldn't have bought the $500 package anyway. I believe macromedia came out a few years ago and said that they put together and distributed a full package version to pirate web sites to do the same. Now it's the most popular program going.
There is some discussion of file sizes for HD programming, but the only current method for recording HD signal is D-VHS, which requires 25GB/hr using MPEG-2. I dont know what kind of compression the TIVO will use, but you're talking about MASSIVE files.
Before you slam drag racing too hard, it's an art. If the skill of a driver like John Force can overcome a 2000 HP deficit between a Top-Fuel and a Funny car, there is something to be said for how it's driven. All that said, I personnally like autocross the best. There is no better showplace for driving skill anywhere. The best part is when you have guys in saturns beating out corvettes, supras, and whatever else people show up in.
I can see a million good uses for this system that have nothing to do with DRM. The stated purpose is to prevent malicious code executing in one part of a system from affecting malicious changes in another part. Tell me how to do that in software? The anti-virus companies have been trying to figure that out for years. On a corporate level, a trusted network would open up a whole new world of groupware possibilities and could prevent many server attacks.
The system is only going to trust "trusted" programs, but there's no way for you to decide if a program is trusted or not, is there?
How do you know? The spec isnt released much less an implementation. Why wouldnt they give the system administrator the ability to trust software? Even microsoft isnt stupid enough to think that they can stop people from writing their own software. They arent moving to make everything have a mandatory digital signiture, or tie software to a user. TCPA (dont know about palladium, but they are different) does not record Personally identifiable information, and your identity on a network or on a workstation is a different throwaway alias for evey transaction. Without personally identifiable information, DRM is non-existant.
All that said, some slashdotters have come up with some interesting takes on how this type of system could facilitate DRM as a trusted layer. While I am willing to concede that point, I dont think that even Microsoft has that kind of market clout. And if they did, thats another whole round of anti-trust action on them. I can see why it looks like they are trying to move computers towards something that resembles an Xbox, but I dont think thats what it is.
finally, for a group that criticizes MS about security nonstop, there sure is a lot of closed minded drivel about big brother computing. MS is less of a monopoly than you think it is.
Palladium as I understand it has NO APPLICATION for content protection. It's not a DRM system. It's a security function so that your hardware knows what it's doing. It will provide a level of security between applications, the OS, and hardware. You should never know that it's there.
If you have a palladium processor and palladium motherboard, hard drive whatever, you arent going to be limited to a palladium enabled OS, you just wont be able to use the benefits of a palladium trusted environment. So said microsoft anyhow.
You dont need to regurgitate an engineer's manifesto, as this is not an engineering issue. A defacto standard is far more important than an engineering standard in today's fast moving technology world. A selling point of Media 9 is not "long term archaval" it's intended to make money NOW for MS and it's users. Communication is in fact it's strong point, as everybody (essentially) uses windows on their desktop, and now that portion that dosent will have access. RFCs are not the laws of nature. W3C recommendations are not handed down by god. If a company can make a better product and convince people to use it, to hell with the standard, resonnance will determine what is worthy.
The only legs that Linux has to stand on is technological quality and price. It just so happens that Windows media has the same two advantages of MPEG-4. The licensing is about half the price the sound quality is the best I have ever heard hands down, and the compression is amazing. Before you go spouting off crap about standards compliance, just remember that Windows is as much of a standard as MPEG.
It is in fact possible to create an abstraction layer that portrays the multi-processor environment monolitically. I assume there would be a way to tinker with it should some developer be so inclined, but I dont see it as a problem. So long as your program is multi-threaded most developers shouldnt have to worry about multi processor spanning techniques.
I say that micropayments are a horrible idea and have no chance of working, and there are significant problems that are only cursorily addressed. Clay Shirky said in the case against micropayments that
"Why does it matter that users hate micropayments? Because users are the ones with the money, and micropayments do not take user preferences into account. In particular, users want predictable and simple pricing. Micropayments, meanwhile, waste the users' mental effort in order to conserve cheap resources, by creating many tiny, unpredictable transactions. Micropayments thus create in the mind of the user both anxiety and confusion, characteristics that users have not heretofore been known to actively seek out."
I find this to be a distant 4th or 5th place reason. I came up with a good list of problems with micropayments that I wrote to the good people that wrote the original article.... This type of model is FAR more economically, socially, politically, ethically, and technologically complicated. (than the article led the reader to believe)
1) PRIVACY issues. Paying means tracking, tracking will NEVER be acceptable. (this is the thermal exhaust port on this Death Star of a model)
2) Resonance to free sites on PRINCIPLE, causing large sites to drive off loyal users.
3) The subsidization of web properties by brick-and-mortar or other media outlets (CNN.com, Bank of America, Music Concerts, etc)
4) Ther lack of QUALITY content, and paying for information that you dont want, or was not worth your paying.
5) Technological security and fraud. Find me an encryption scheme that is flawless and that the industry and government can agree on.
6) International nature of Internet. Would be illegal in some countries under uniform transaction laws, (content disclosure, per-transaction approval, and privacy) currency exchange, and cultural roadblocks (VERY SIGNIFICANT)
7) Third world inequality. A penny may not be much when you make 50k per year, but what about a Hatian making 600 USD that has access to a computer? This could promote SEVERE social inequity across impoverished nations.
8) User shift back to free/no media. This type of model could very easily drive users off the internet. ISP fees are exorbitant as they are, ($20/month is a lot of money to the poor, to many minority groups, and to students. These are the groups that stand to benefit the most from the Internet.) computers are overpriced (compared to what they COULD cost i.e. MS Xbox is a fully functional high end Pentium 3 computer that can be sold under 300 USD with a minimal loss that will be recouped in licenesing fees)
9) Would destroy existing advertising base on web (more successful than you let on)
10) Would require massive upgrades to existing server and client software, and render all previous packages obsolete. Server software upgrade costs alone would be MASSIVE.
I think the following quote from another user summarized it best
"Incredibly dumb article. Not worth the 5 cents it would have cost me to read it. Casual browsing would plummet. Maybe the phone number and map providers would do well, but I think [small website] might not. I figure it's casual readers who come here to read about [specialized information] not people who are going to pay. I also question the logic that we need penny-per-page to keep the phone number and map providers afloat... they seem to be doing fine."
thats it
That's not 100% accurate. The "Law" applies to traditional silicon transistors. When some technology come along to displace silicon, (optical semiconductors, quantum computers, etc) then all bets are off. There is no reason at that point that all processing couldnt be done simultaneously in a very short time frame. At that point, I/O would be the limiting factor.
Well, I'm 100% sure (the highest accuracy possible) that the universe is between 23.5 and Infinity years old. I mean seriously, it's great that their methods produced something usable, but a media grab with a sound bite like this is stupid.
It's really great to want to have a full understanding of the function of the atmosphere before modifying it, but there are others that are not so patient. I can absolutely promise that If the western world dosent take the lead in this or any other emerging powerful technology (genetics, nanotech, quatum computing, etc) there are plenty of others that will have no such qualms.
What they need to overtake is bicoastal themeparks. They can have houses with futuristic toilets and pets and such. A wing commander ride would be schweet though
I buy enough geeky crap ove the course of a year that what I really want for xmas is a clothing, personal hygine products, or books. If I want something techy, I want to pick it out and play with it first.
While I have to agree with you on your point, I think the idea of a.porn domain is a wonderful one. Legitimate pornography businesses could migrate themselves to.porn and not bother anybody. They know that people looking for porn will seek it out, and those that want to filter it out wont. If a few big outlets move over to a new domain, people will begin to only trust that particular domain. While it is a VERY distributed industry, resonance can shift the whole thing very quickly.
I dont know a whole lot about internet architecture, but is there a reason that TLDs are crucial to operations? Why couldnt I have brian.norton? Why cant there be an unlimited number of TLDs?
The current decision decided that the new tlds must be implemented in a timely manner... Proposals must be submitted by 2009, and a formal decision can be expected by 2123.
fancy databases cost $X up to a certain size. Then they cost ten times that if you go over that limit by one byte because you have to buy the "next size up."
Well my contribution to keeping down the size of their database will be not subscribing...
What productivity advantage do you see over a laptop? I'm curious about this also. The ability to use a pen as an input device is no more efficient than a keyboard, and can introduce a lot of error. If it's size, have you tried small laptops (I have a 2.4 lb Fujitsu Lifebook P that is cheap, fast, and the battery lasts forever.)
The one idea I did think of was mounting one on the front of a segway to act as auto-pilot and so you could use the internet while being driven to work.
Your math is just fine, except that it would only need to be done once for the full set, and in an industrial setting this isnt a big problem. 10 burners working together could pound this out in 3 hours. Reliable backups are expensive. No way around it.
I dont know for a fact, but that definitely sounds like something that could be solved with a proper EQ setting. I dont know how you connect your MP3s to your car, but if it is some high resistance analog adapter thing, that's the first thing to look at.
Slashdot Mirror
I had a friend that worked at adobe a few years ago that told me that they release 10-20 serial numbers into the wild for about all of their products so that kids resizing and cropping will choose their software. When the kids grow up, they'll know Photoshop/GoLive/Illustrator/whatever and will be more likley to purchase it or recommend it for purchase to their company. Nothing really lost as they wouldn't have bought the $500 package anyway. I believe macromedia came out a few years ago and said that they put together and distributed a full package version to pirate web sites to do the same. Now it's the most popular program going.
There is some discussion of file sizes for HD programming, but the only current method for recording HD signal is D-VHS, which requires 25GB/hr using MPEG-2. I dont know what kind of compression the TIVO will use, but you're talking about MASSIVE files.
Before you slam drag racing too hard, it's an art. If the skill of a driver like John Force can overcome a 2000 HP deficit between a Top-Fuel and a Funny car, there is something to be said for how it's driven. All that said, I personnally like autocross the best. There is no better showplace for driving skill anywhere. The best part is when you have guys in saturns beating out corvettes, supras, and whatever else people show up in.
The system is only going to trust "trusted" programs, but there's no way for you to decide if a program is trusted or not, is there?
How do you know? The spec isnt released much less an implementation. Why wouldnt they give the system administrator the ability to trust software? Even microsoft isnt stupid enough to think that they can stop people from writing their own software. They arent moving to make everything have a mandatory digital signiture, or tie software to a user. TCPA (dont know about palladium, but they are different) does not record Personally identifiable information, and your identity on a network or on a workstation is a different throwaway alias for evey transaction. Without personally identifiable information, DRM is non-existant.
All that said, some slashdotters have come up with some interesting takes on how this type of system could facilitate DRM as a trusted layer. While I am willing to concede that point, I dont think that even Microsoft has that kind of market clout. And if they did, thats another whole round of anti-trust action on them. I can see why it looks like they are trying to move computers towards something that resembles an Xbox, but I dont think thats what it is.
finally, for a group that criticizes MS about security nonstop, there sure is a lot of closed minded drivel about big brother computing. MS is less of a monopoly than you think it is.
And where did you find this out? Point me somewhere that says this? Read the documentation, dont jump to conclusions.
Palladium as I understand it has NO APPLICATION for content protection. It's not a DRM system. It's a security function so that your hardware knows what it's doing. It will provide a level of security between applications, the OS, and hardware. You should never know that it's there.
If you have a palladium processor and palladium motherboard, hard drive whatever, you arent going to be limited to a palladium enabled OS, you just wont be able to use the benefits of a palladium trusted environment. So said microsoft anyhow.
You dont need to regurgitate an engineer's manifesto, as this is not an engineering issue. A defacto standard is far more important than an engineering standard in today's fast moving technology world. A selling point of Media 9 is not "long term archaval" it's intended to make money NOW for MS and it's users. Communication is in fact it's strong point, as everybody (essentially) uses windows on their desktop, and now that portion that dosent will have access. RFCs are not the laws of nature. W3C recommendations are not handed down by god. If a company can make a better product and convince people to use it, to hell with the standard, resonnance will determine what is worthy.
The only legs that Linux has to stand on is technological quality and price. It just so happens that Windows media has the same two advantages of MPEG-4. The licensing is about half the price the sound quality is the best I have ever heard hands down, and the compression is amazing. Before you go spouting off crap about standards compliance, just remember that Windows is as much of a standard as MPEG.
It is in fact possible to create an abstraction layer that portrays the multi-processor environment monolitically. I assume there would be a way to tinker with it should some developer be so inclined, but I dont see it as a problem. So long as your program is multi-threaded most developers shouldnt have to worry about multi processor spanning techniques.
I say that micropayments are a horrible idea and have no chance of working, and there are significant problems that are only cursorily addressed. Clay Shirky said in the case against micropayments that "Why does it matter that users hate micropayments? Because users are the ones with the money, and micropayments do not take user preferences into account. In particular, users want predictable and simple pricing. Micropayments, meanwhile, waste the users' mental effort in order to conserve cheap resources, by creating many tiny, unpredictable transactions. Micropayments thus create in the mind of the user both anxiety and confusion, characteristics that users have not heretofore been known to actively seek out." I find this to be a distant 4th or 5th place reason. I came up with a good list of problems with micropayments that I wrote to the good people that wrote the original article. ... This type of model is FAR more economically, socially, politically, ethically, and technologically complicated. (than the article led the reader to believe)
1) PRIVACY issues. Paying means tracking, tracking will NEVER be acceptable. (this is the thermal exhaust port on this Death Star of a model)
2) Resonance to free sites on PRINCIPLE, causing large sites to drive off loyal users.
3) The subsidization of web properties by brick-and-mortar or other media outlets (CNN.com, Bank of America, Music Concerts, etc)
4) Ther lack of QUALITY content, and paying for information that you dont want, or was not worth your paying.
5) Technological security and fraud. Find me an encryption scheme that is flawless and that the industry and government can agree on.
6) International nature of Internet. Would be illegal in some countries under uniform transaction laws, (content disclosure, per-transaction approval, and privacy) currency exchange, and cultural roadblocks (VERY SIGNIFICANT)
7) Third world inequality. A penny may not be much when you make 50k per year, but what about a Hatian making 600 USD that has access to a computer? This could promote SEVERE social inequity across impoverished nations.
8) User shift back to free/no media. This type of model could very easily drive users off the internet. ISP fees are exorbitant as they are, ($20/month is a lot of money to the poor, to many minority groups, and to students. These are the groups that stand to benefit the most from the Internet.) computers are overpriced (compared to what they COULD cost i.e. MS Xbox is a fully functional high end Pentium 3 computer that can be sold under 300 USD with a minimal loss that will be recouped in licenesing fees)
9) Would destroy existing advertising base on web (more successful than you let on)
10) Would require massive upgrades to existing server and client software, and render all previous packages obsolete. Server software upgrade costs alone would be MASSIVE.
I think the following quote from another user summarized it best
"Incredibly dumb article. Not worth the 5 cents it would have cost me to read it. Casual browsing would plummet. Maybe the phone number and map providers would do well, but I think [small website] might not. I figure it's casual readers who come here to read about [specialized information] not people who are going to pay. I also question the logic that we need penny-per-page to keep the phone number and map providers afloat... they seem to be doing fine."
thats it
That's not 100% accurate. The "Law" applies to traditional silicon transistors. When some technology come along to displace silicon, (optical semiconductors, quantum computers, etc) then all bets are off. There is no reason at that point that all processing couldnt be done simultaneously in a very short time frame. At that point, I/O would be the limiting factor.
Well, I'm 100% sure (the highest accuracy possible) that the universe is between 23.5 and Infinity years old. I mean seriously, it's great that their methods produced something usable, but a media grab with a sound bite like this is stupid.
It's really great to want to have a full understanding of the function of the atmosphere before modifying it, but there are others that are not so patient. I can absolutely promise that If the western world dosent take the lead in this or any other emerging powerful technology (genetics, nanotech, quatum computing, etc) there are plenty of others that will have no such qualms.
What they need to overtake is bicoastal themeparks. They can have houses with futuristic toilets and pets and such. A wing commander ride would be schweet though
I propose that if you spent the three billion or so dollars that pioneer cost, you could in fact make a sturdy ANYTHING terrestrial.
I buy enough geeky crap ove the course of a year that what I really want for xmas is a clothing, personal hygine products, or books. If I want something techy, I want to pick it out and play with it first.
While I have to agree with you on your point, I think the idea of a .porn domain is a wonderful one. Legitimate pornography businesses could migrate themselves to .porn and not bother anybody. They know that people looking for porn will seek it out, and those that want to filter it out wont. If a few big outlets move over to a new domain, people will begin to only trust that particular domain. While it is a VERY distributed industry, resonance can shift the whole thing very quickly.
I dont know a whole lot about internet architecture, but is there a reason that TLDs are crucial to operations? Why couldnt I have brian.norton? Why cant there be an unlimited number of TLDs?
The current decision decided that the new tlds must be implemented in a timely manner... Proposals must be submitted by 2009, and a formal decision can be expected by 2123.
fancy databases cost $X up to a certain size. Then they cost ten times that if you go over that limit by one byte because you have to buy the "next size up."
Well my contribution to keeping down the size of their database will be not subscribing...
The one idea I did think of was mounting one on the front of a segway to act as auto-pilot and so you could use the internet while being driven to work.
Your math is just fine, except that it would only need to be done once for the full set, and in an industrial setting this isnt a big problem. 10 burners working together could pound this out in 3 hours. Reliable backups are expensive. No way around it.
I dont know for a fact, but that definitely sounds like something that could be solved with a proper EQ setting. I dont know how you connect your MP3s to your car, but if it is some high resistance analog adapter thing, that's the first thing to look at.
I played all the games out on a 28.8 bps modem JUST FINE thank you.