under a license that allows a commercial entity to copy and profit from my work without credit The BSD license requires people to credit you too, it just doesn't stop them developing proprietary software based upon your code.
Come, come... Certainly, you are not saying, that Apple's FreeBSD-derived MacOS is less marketable, than Novell's Linux-derived SUSE (or whatever)... No, I believe that he's suggesting that a BSD-licensed functional equivalent of the GPLed code in question might not have been available.
The only time non-Microsoft products enter the enterprise is when these people aren't part of the decision process. For example: our new PBX system runs Asterix Those feisty Gauls sure know how to get what they want.
Killer Pram? Won't somebody think of the children!! Flash-killer Pram at that...
I'm visualising the 6-month-old son of Ming the Merciless trying to run over Flash Gordon in a pram.
I'm a psychopath with all sorts of perversions, both sexual and violent. I admit to killing small animals when I was a youth, just to watch them die. Dude, we know how sick you are already! Your old sig was
"If God didn't want us fucking livestock, why did he make them so sexy?" Damn, that was the best/. sig ever, why did you change it?!
Dude, IPv6 is NEVER gonna happen. I been hearin that we was gonna run outta IPv4 addresses since 95. DIDN'T HAPPEN. Troll or not, fair point that has been made a number of times over the years, and there's some truth in it.
Want to know what's changed in the past few years (apart from the significant decrease in free IPv4 address blocks since 2000), and why it's far more likely to take off now? Simple.
Could be argued that the Chinese government have their own reasons (cynical or otherwise) for supporting this, and that there's no need for the rest of us to go along with it. However, it's not like they're supporting some proprietery technology (a la SVCD). And although they're nowhere near the West in terms of technology penetration (yet), it's a fair bet that the sheer size of the market will encourage many in the rest of the world to support IPv6 as well. This could be the catalyst that will finally encourage IPv6 to take off properly.
I use about 20% opacity and clone stamp from multiple locations to avoid visible "sameness". Whilst this may avoid the detection method described, it will also have the effect of averaging out noise- maybe not visibly, but very possibly noticeable if someone is trying to determine if an image has been forged.
You might think that, but under 16s legally buy and install PC games all the time. All of them also have EULAs who is entering into a contract by proxy in that situation? But that's not the situation we were discussing. You asked- and I quote- "what if I get my 7yr old cousin to "accept"".
As I said, IANAL, but I strongly suspect that a court (in full possession of the facts) would treat this somewhat differently to the same cousin buying and installing a copy of Barbie Horse Adventures of his own volition.
In short, even if any EULA "accepted" by a minor has no legal power, I would *not* assume that a court would absolve me of any responsibility if it was clear that I had got them to sign it by proxy; quite the opposite.
Of course, in real life, there is also the issue of proving who clicked the "accept" button anyway. My gut reaction is that the court would more likely view this from the perspective of the person who was likely to have licensed the software anyway. That is, they would be more likely to accept that it was your cousin who installed "Barbie Horse Adventures", whereas a £1500 high-end architect's CAD that was the same as the one you used at work (and that your cousin clearly had no interest in) would probably be yours. And whether you had got your cousin to click "accept" would probably be irrelevant.
(Again; to re-emphasise.... IANAL. Also, the above assumes that EULAs are legitimate in the first place- whilst that may be open to debate, it wasn't the point that I was addressing).
The whole nielson rating thing stinks to high heaven. What the game console manufacturers can't count the number of game consoles they have sold and have to rely on B$ statistical manipulation. I own a TV-based games console. It's a late-70s/early-80s "Prinztronic" console with a single cart containing several Pong-like "sports" games. Does this count?
Does my Nintendo DS count (even though it's not a TV console)?
XXXX, tooheys, VB, boags, coopers and Gulf are beers Australians actually drink. Yeah, well as the old joke goes, Why do Australians call their beer XXXX? Because they can't spell piss:-)
In the same vein, what if I get my 7yr old cousin to "accept" (she's perfectly capable of clicking "next") it? Here in the UK, at least, minors cannot enter into contracts. IANAL and I don't play one on the Internet, but I strongly suspect that such action-by-proxy would not be the simple solution you think it might be. Whether or not it was legally possible for them to consider that you (as a responsible adult) had signed the contract by proxy, I suspect there may be other issues of (your) responsibility at stake.
Indeed. I'm actually looking forward to some "willing" participants in my abuse fantasies:o Has anyone seen the robot in the photograph that accompanies the story (the one on the left, if you had trouble guessing). Phwoar, eh lads? Eh, eh..... PHWOAR! Bet she's a bit of a goer, eh? Nudge, nudge..... Beautiful lips and *big* eyes. (*) With looks like that I bet she's going to be launching a few sexual harassment lawsuits, right?
Er... well, then again...
(*) Having said that, I've seen some of the freakishly large doe-eyes in "erotic" (cough) manga images, and I bet there are more than a few Japanese nerds that got imprinted upon oversized eyes at puberty that'll be massively turned on by this robot.:-6
Things like these are going to be a problem a serious problem in any negotiations, I can hardly think of any way to demonstrate more clearly that freedom of speech is not something that is not practiced in Turkey. There are strong forces opposed to EU membership within Turkey, and it has been speculated on at least one occasion that decisions like this and others are attempts to rock the boat and weaken the chances of Turkey joining the EU, orchestrated by such people.
That's inaccurate. The iPhone is 2G, but it supports the EDGE standard. Which is a high-speed 2.5G-style technology. So, the iPhone has the required technology to provide MMS support, but will it? I can't find any sources. 2.5G, or 2.75G or whatever is still layered on top of the 2G networks, and the European operators all have a vested interest in 3G. Even if it were possible with 2G/EDGE, I can't see it happening.
They want to sell things like TV episodes and so on, I can't see them reworking the system just for a 2G iPhone, plus there's not really enough capacity for that sort of thing with 2G; or if they charged for it at the normal 2G data rates, it would be horrifically expensive.
Although this is irrelevant, because as someone said in one of the replies to my original message, Apple *are* planning on a 3G version of the iPhone.
Does that mean a film moving at 50/60 progressive frames would appear to be moving at the same rate as a video source moving 50/60 fields per second? Or would it prove to have a completely different effect? Well, really, it depends what you mean by "would appear to be moving at the same rate".
I haven't seen genuine film running at 60fps for the simple reason that most films are shot at 24fps. Film played back at 2x speed on my DVD player exhibits video-like motion fluidity (*); but that's not the same as real film shot and played back at 50 or 60 fps. But yes, it would probably exhibit the same "moving" feel.
It should be noted that there are several distinct reasons for the difference between film and video. Whilst frame rate is arguably the most significant and obvious (**), there are also issues of grain, lighting, colour and light response, composition, depth-of-field, etc. Traditional video can be de-interlaced to 25fps (with loss of quality). In Britain nowadays, many productions are shot on digital video at- I suspect- 25fps non-interlaced. Reducing the frame rate does give a somewhat film-like feel, but post-processing and different lighting and composition are truly required to complete the illusion.
I suspect the converse is also true; film at 50/60fps probably wouldn't look identical to interlaced video, but it would likely have a somewhat "video-like" feel due to the increased fluidity of motion.
I'd rather see (and purchase) a custom ARM9-based PC with ZetaOS or something with a very funky basic compiler/interpreter on which all programs use BASIC. If your version of BASIC bore any resemblance to the unstructured implementations which appeared on most 8-bit computers, and particularly the crude POKE-reliant C64 implementation, I'd shoot you before you could damage another generation of programmers.
Ooh... let's hope you weren't planning on loading any games from the tape deck.
If Wikipedia is correct that the tape deck was 300 baud, then that's 37.5 bytes per second, 135,000 bytes per hour.
3583 megabytes = 3.757 x 10^9 bytes, divided by 135,000 this means your program would take...
27,830 hours, or 1160 days, or 3.17 years to load a game that filled the computer's memory.
And let's put this in perspective; that's less than a single-layer DVD's worth. The equivalent of a full 8.5GB dual-layer DVD would take approx 7.7 years to multi-load, and 44,968 standard C90 cassettes to store.
Take these figures with a pinch of salt; also IIRC a lot of C64 games were auto-decompressed upon load which would have speeded up the raw figures quite a bit. But..... yeah. *cough*
Today, even AmigaOS would be a top seller if only those bastar^H^Hkind folks who own the rights would open source it or actually do something with it, like porting the system to tablets and portable computers, instead of letting it die slowly. IMHO, AmigaOS (regardless of its status) would only sell to the diehard hobbyists still using their Amigas. From a mainstream point-of-view, the Amiga OS has been too long dead for any new version of it to have any advantage over a written-and-launched-from-scratch operating system. (See here for more discussion on that subject).
How about if they manage to fit some miniature system in an A1200-lookalike case? Might please a few Amiga diehards, but too far past C='s (and the Amiga's) commercial peak for commercial nostalgia exploitation; more people would have fond memories of the A500.
But if they really wanted to exploit the nostalgia market that way, they'd be best advised to slap something in a repro C64 case (classic "breadbox" version, of course). In fact, if they had the case, it would probably be trivial to stick a small form-factor PC in there, with some sort of emulator onboard; possibly using the C64 30-in-one chips.
I have a Commodore PC at home. It's just a standard 486 beige box[1] with a Commodore label on. I bought it second hand and used it as a firewall.
When one of my friends saw the label, he assumed it was some kind of joke. I had to explain that Commodore sold PCs before they went down. At least that was made (or at least sold) by the "real" Commodore, though, despite the company's crapness. "Commodore Gaming" are just a bunch of unrelated guys that bought the name... so what?
As another poster said, buy an old name, slap it on any old equipment; Commodore's brands have been exploited this way before. Things is, these tactics seem to get some attention from the press. Does the "new" Napster have any more relation to the original service (or its owners) than any other legal download service? No; but the press hyped up its "rebirth" as if it did. Or perhaps it was just an excuse to write some articles about the download market; whatever. At least new Napster was doing sort of the same thing as the original company.
Personally, I don't mind Infogrames using the Atari name, because the original company is long dead (and was latterly crap). What pisses me off is that- for no reason I can see other than a third-rate designer justifying his salary (FOAD)- they mucked about with the original "Fuji" logo. Yeah, I know, they just changed the middle bar; but the original's brilliance *was* that it was so simple, yet well-designed.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you claiming that Linksys didn't have the option of paying damages to those whose code it had illegally distributed instead?
I'm visualising the 6-month-old son of Ming the Merciless trying to run over Flash Gordon in a pram.
"If God didn't want us fucking livestock, why did he make them so sexy?" Damn, that was the best
Want to know what's changed in the past few years (apart from the significant decrease in free IPv4 address blocks since 2000), and why it's far more likely to take off now? Simple.
The Chinese are supporting it in a big way.
Could be argued that the Chinese government have their own reasons (cynical or otherwise) for supporting this, and that there's no need for the rest of us to go along with it. However, it's not like they're supporting some proprietery technology (a la SVCD). And although they're nowhere near the West in terms of technology penetration (yet), it's a fair bet that the sheer size of the market will encourage many in the rest of the world to support IPv6 as well. This could be the catalyst that will finally encourage IPv6 to take off properly.
As I said, IANAL, but I strongly suspect that a court (in full possession of the facts) would treat this somewhat differently to the same cousin buying and installing a copy of Barbie Horse Adventures of his own volition.
In short, even if any EULA "accepted" by a minor has no legal power, I would *not* assume that a court would absolve me of any responsibility if it was clear that I had got them to sign it by proxy; quite the opposite.
Of course, in real life, there is also the issue of proving who clicked the "accept" button anyway. My gut reaction is that the court would more likely view this from the perspective of the person who was likely to have licensed the software anyway. That is, they would be more likely to accept that it was your cousin who installed "Barbie Horse Adventures", whereas a £1500 high-end architect's CAD that was the same as the one you used at work (and that your cousin clearly had no interest in) would probably be yours. And whether you had got your cousin to click "accept" would probably be irrelevant.
(Again; to re-emphasise.... IANAL. Also, the above assumes that EULAs are legitimate in the first place- whilst that may be open to debate, it wasn't the point that I was addressing).
Does my Nintendo DS count (even though it's not a TV console)?
Er... well, then again...
(*) Having said that, I've seen some of the freakishly large doe-eyes in "erotic" (cough) manga images, and I bet there are more than a few Japanese nerds that got imprinted upon oversized eyes at puberty that'll be massively turned on by this robot.
They want to sell things like TV episodes and so on, I can't see them reworking the system just for a 2G iPhone, plus there's not really enough capacity for that sort of thing with 2G; or if they charged for it at the normal 2G data rates, it would be horrifically expensive.
Although this is irrelevant, because as someone said in one of the replies to my original message, Apple *are* planning on a 3G version of the iPhone.
I haven't seen genuine film running at 60fps for the simple reason that most films are shot at 24fps. Film played back at 2x speed on my DVD player exhibits video-like motion fluidity (*); but that's not the same as real film shot and played back at 50 or 60 fps. But yes, it would probably exhibit the same "moving" feel.
It should be noted that there are several distinct reasons for the difference between film and video. Whilst frame rate is arguably the most significant and obvious (**), there are also issues of grain, lighting, colour and light response, composition, depth-of-field, etc. Traditional video can be de-interlaced to 25fps (with loss of quality). In Britain nowadays, many productions are shot on digital video at- I suspect- 25fps non-interlaced. Reducing the frame rate does give a somewhat film-like feel, but post-processing and different lighting and composition are truly required to complete the illusion.
I suspect the converse is also true; film at 50/60fps probably wouldn't look identical to interlaced video, but it would likely have a somewhat "video-like" feel due to the increased fluidity of motion.
I recommend that you read this article on "VidFire", this one (on VidFire too) and this one on filmizing.
(*) It was this observation on some video tapes that inspired the creator of VidFire.
(**) Obvious in that most uninformed people would notice that there was a difference, although wouldn't be able to put their finger on the reason.
Were the "real" Commodore PCs actually built (or at least assembled) by them, or were they just someone else's PCs that C= slapped their name on?
I'm not sure if that was a joke or not.
Ooh... let's hope you weren't planning on loading any games from the tape deck.
If Wikipedia is correct that the tape deck was 300 baud, then that's 37.5 bytes per second, 135,000 bytes per hour.
3583 megabytes = 3.757 x 10^9 bytes, divided by 135,000 this means your program would take...
27,830 hours, or 1160 days, or 3.17 years to load a game that filled the computer's memory.
And let's put this in perspective; that's less than a single-layer DVD's worth. The equivalent of a full 8.5GB dual-layer DVD would take approx 7.7 years to multi-load, and 44,968 standard C90 cassettes to store.
Take these figures with a pinch of salt; also IIRC a lot of C64 games were auto-decompressed upon load which would have speeded up the raw figures quite a bit. But..... yeah. *cough*
But if they really wanted to exploit the nostalgia market that way, they'd be best advised to slap something in a repro C64 case (classic "breadbox" version, of course). In fact, if they had the case, it would probably be trivial to stick a small form-factor PC in there, with some sort of emulator onboard; possibly using the C64 30-in-one chips.
As another poster said, buy an old name, slap it on any old equipment; Commodore's brands have been exploited this way before. Things is, these tactics seem to get some attention from the press. Does the "new" Napster have any more relation to the original service (or its owners) than any other legal download service? No; but the press hyped up its "rebirth" as if it did. Or perhaps it was just an excuse to write some articles about the download market; whatever. At least new Napster was doing sort of the same thing as the original company.
Personally, I don't mind Infogrames using the Atari name, because the original company is long dead (and was latterly crap). What pisses me off is that- for no reason I can see other than a third-rate designer justifying his salary (FOAD)- they mucked about with the original "Fuji" logo. Yeah, I know, they just changed the middle bar; but the original's brilliance *was* that it was so simple, yet well-designed.