Let's use the function g(x) g(x)=O(f(x)) means that g(x) = cf(x) for some c
and
g(x)=theta(f(x)) means that c1f(x) = g(x) = c2f(x) for some constants c1 and c2. All of these are asymptotic, that is the input must be greater than or equal to some smallest value that behaves this way.
FreeDB->hit "rip"->go do something for 15 minutes->repeat
It's pretty easy to do 20-30 CD's in a night when you're just sitting around watching TV or playing with the computer. I't snot like you have to be there for the whole entire rip, just to insert/eject CDs and make sure that EAC gets the right FreeDB entry. Can't say I've done 1000 CDs, but I've certainly done 100s, and it hasn't been a problem.
Actually, further is just an extension of things that have been going on for years. It goes all the way back to the Dead and people trading tapes from the reel-to-reel masters of a show, etc. There's a long standing tradition of many bands that allow taping of their shows, and trading (without profit) of those tapes.
Recently, this has been extended to the digital world, with furthernet being only the most recent addition to the mix. There's also (most prominently) etree.org which is the backbone of a system of FTP servers coupled with mailing lists that distribute ligitimate live music.
So, to touch on your fear that "sharing may not be legal" and that "the RIAA could[n't] care less what the bands want," in this case, the sharing is legal, and the RIAA can't do nuthin' about it. The RIAA does not have copyright on a live recording, simple as that. The copyright for that show belongs solely to the band that played, and they have the right (and many exercise this right) to a) allow people to tape them and b) allow those tapers to freely trade their tapes.
ATI released just recently Linux drivers for Radeon 8500 which was released over a year ago.
This is incorrect. This comes up every time someone mentions ATI cards... ATI does not release *nix drivers for their products. What they do do is release the specs for their hardware so that a developer who chooses to do so can write a driver for the card, under any OS.
This is both good and bad, although I think the good outwieghs the bad. The good is that the linux driver will be open sourced (hopefully). This means that the card can potentially be improved un in software long after it has ceased to be viable in the retail market.
On the other hand, ATi does not and will not support linux drivers for their cards. If you want help, you have to go straight to the developer, who is most likely a volunteer with other things to do. It also means that there is a delay between the release of a card and the drivers for it because any developer has to read through the docs and understand them before he/she can even begin work on the driver.
That said, I prefer the ATI policy of "release the specs so anyone can write a driver" over NVidia's "we'll only provide drivers for MSWindows/Linux/Mac(maybe)" where those using BSD or any other OS are SOL.
Agreed. But the parent of my post was trying to pin the scandals (and the lax enforcement that they resulted from) on Clinton and the Democrats. I was simply refuting that.
You forget that during Clinton's terms, much pro-corporation legislation was proposed and supported by Republican senators - the pres. is not the only one responsible for anything.
The Enron et. al. scandals are not the fault of one person or one party. They are the product of an increasing trend in this country to favour big business of small businesses and consumers. The only way to change things is to communicate with your representatives and USE YOUR VOTE!
I've posted this before in earlier topics, but I feel like I should post it again. ATI has (IMHO) a much better attitude towards linux (and other OSes as well) than NVIDIA. Sure, with a GeForce you know that the driver is built by the people who built the chipset, but it's closed source, and the NVIDIA driver is the only way to go. ATI releases the specs for all their cards openly (after signing up as a developer) so that any number of people can work on ATI drivers for any number of operating systems. This means that the DRM for a Radeon is included in the 2.4.x kernel series. This means that TV in and TV out and accelerated MPEG playback are (or will be) supported under Linux through the GATOS project.
Personally, I far prefer a company that releases open specs over a company that releases minimally supported closed source drivers.
Duplicate crash reports.. Not bug reports. Crash reports let them get info on multiple systems with different hardware, software, etc for ONE bug. Multiple bug reports do nothing but waste time.
I have written a letter, to Hollings and to all of my representatives (I'm from VT, so there are three) and I recieved a letter from Sen. Patrick Leahy as well.
I WILL be thinking about this legislation when I vote next time, you can be sure of that.
No, something WILL happen, because in this case, it will be a law that corporations have to abide by. If you look at copyright, it's always by attacking corporations that the copyright holders fight their battle against pirace. Very seldom (if ever) are individuals taken to court for having a few illegal pieces of software or some downloaded MP3s.
The problem comes when a large business has these things, or even worse, distributes them. Look at the Napster case and the pending cases against other P2P software companies. The RIAA/MPAA DO NOT ATTACK INDIVIDUALS. What the CBDTPA will do is make sure that corporations follow the rules by only creating devices that comply with the legislation, therby limiting what a consumer will do. If a company produces a device that does not comply, the RIAA/MPAA are guaranteed to notice, and that comapny is guaranteed to be taken to court.
Legislation IS NOT the answer to this problem - copyright is a job for the courts, on a case by case basis. Copyright is not intended to limit consumer rights, which is what the CBDTPA will do. Copyright exists to protect content creators, but that protection is and should be limited in time and scope.
Regardless of the immediate consequences of Hollings' bill, it will open the door for more and more intrusions on our "right" to fair use (which is more of a historical trend than a right, and it should be treated as such. Fair use does not allow the copying of works we have not paid for or the distribution of copyrighted works to others without consent. In this light, much P2P software use is illegal, which ahs been shown in the courts.). The question is not how this bill, as horrible as it is, will affect us, but what is to come after it. I'm afraid of some day not being able to easily record MY guitar on MY computer without paying/contacting/registering with some central authority. It is in our FUTURE rights that the CBDTPA's true danger lies.
For the first one, though, I have a much bigger problem. Can anyone cite any other [industry / realm / product space] where one is required to retain all receipts in order to prove ownership? I don't need a receipt to show that I own the shirt I'm wearing. If someone wants to accuse me of stealing it, show some evidence. I don't need a receipt to verify that I own the couch in my living room -- if someone thinks I stole it from my neighbor, fine, prove it. So, why on earth do I need a receipt for software?
It seems to me that this would be an issue of burden of proof, and I think you've hit the nail on the head. It's not your responsibility to prove you're innocent. The burden of proof lies on the accuser (I'm using all these terms rather loosely here) to show that you've committed a crime.
Damn, now I think it's even worse than I did at first:P
This may be the case for the AIW 8500 128 (no DV) but I can't say for sure. I know that the AIW7500 uses a different (analog) tv capture circuit than the (digital) 8500DV, if the 8500 sans DV uses the same digital capture device, then it may be safe to assume that it's supported by GATO.
I'm not sure how much suppor there is for the video capture features of the card under Linux right now. However, ATI releases all the specs to their cards so that people like the DRI project can develop drivers for them (which is much cooler IMHO than NVidia's closed drivers). So, while it may take longer for the drivers to mature, they will most likely be free software.
A little off your question... I've seen a few people complaining about their AIW Radeon's, etc. I just have to say that (owning an AIW 7500) the drivers are much more mature than what they talk about. I've had no problems using the capture functions, no problems with any game (D3D or OpenGL) and it DOES encode to non-proprietary formats (MPEG2, AVI, etc) to allow for editing w/out conversion.
The quality is fantastic (I can't wait till I get somewhere where I have reception). I recommend getting one of these card if TV+good 3D acceleration is your bag.
And this is exactly what the default of copyright law says. If I purchase, download or otherwise procure a copyrighted work, I have no legal right to copy or modify it with the purpose of redistribution. While the quoted section of the GPL makes this blatantly (and I believe wonderfully) clear, it is not needed for that to be the effect.
Ahh, but if I use my handy Tiny Personal Firewall to block that silly GAIN program, it can't talk to its server, so it can't do anything to me... Muahahaha!
Slashdot Mirror
I think you're confused.
Let's use the function g(x)
g(x)=O(f(x)) means that g(x) = cf(x) for some c
and
g(x)=theta(f(x)) means that c1f(x) = g(x) = c2f(x) for some constants c1 and c2. All of these are asymptotic, that is the input must be greater than or equal to some smallest value that behaves this way.
I don't think this quite gets the point across that you want it to, "I'm just a theta(n) person in a theta(log n) world." would work better;)
FreeDB->hit "rip"->go do something for 15 minutes->repeat
It's pretty easy to do 20-30 CD's in a night when you're just sitting around watching TV or playing with the computer. I't snot like you have to be there for the whole entire rip, just to insert/eject CDs and make sure that EAC gets the right FreeDB entry. Can't say I've done 1000 CDs, but I've certainly done 100s, and it hasn't been a problem.
Thank god slashdot doesn't permit the "" tag.
Actually, further is just an extension of things that have been going on for years. It goes all the way back to the Dead and people trading tapes from the reel-to-reel masters of a show, etc. There's a long standing tradition of many bands that allow taping of their shows, and trading (without profit) of those tapes.
Recently, this has been extended to the digital world, with furthernet being only the most recent addition to the mix. There's also (most prominently) etree.org which is the backbone of a system of FTP servers coupled with mailing lists that distribute ligitimate live music.
So, to touch on your fear that "sharing may not be legal" and that "the RIAA could[n't] care less what the bands want," in this case, the sharing is legal, and the RIAA can't do nuthin' about it. The RIAA does not have copyright on a live recording, simple as that. The copyright for that show belongs solely to the band that played, and they have the right (and many exercise this right) to a) allow people to tape them and b) allow those tapers to freely trade their tapes.
ATI released just recently Linux drivers for Radeon 8500 which was released over a year ago.
... ATI does not release *nix drivers for their products. What they do do is release the specs for their hardware so that a developer who chooses to do so can write a driver for the card, under any OS.
This is incorrect. This comes up every time someone mentions ATI cards
This is both good and bad, although I think the good outwieghs the bad. The good is that the linux driver will be open sourced (hopefully). This means that the card can potentially be improved un in software long after it has ceased to be viable in the retail market.
On the other hand, ATi does not and will not support linux drivers for their cards. If you want help, you have to go straight to the developer, who is most likely a volunteer with other things to do. It also means that there is a delay between the release of a card and the drivers for it because any developer has to read through the docs and understand them before he/she can even begin work on the driver.
That said, I prefer the ATI policy of "release the specs so anyone can write a driver" over NVidia's "we'll only provide drivers for MSWindows/Linux/Mac(maybe)" where those using BSD or any other OS are SOL.
Agreed. But the parent of my post was trying to pin the scandals (and the lax enforcement that they resulted from) on Clinton and the Democrats. I was simply refuting that.
You forget that during Clinton's terms, much pro-corporation legislation was proposed and supported by Republican senators - the pres. is not the only one responsible for anything.
The Enron et. al. scandals are not the fault of one person or one party. They are the product of an increasing trend in this country to favour big business of small businesses and consumers. The only way to change things is to communicate with your representatives and USE YOUR VOTE!
I've posted this before in earlier topics, but I feel like I should post it again. ATI has (IMHO) a much better attitude towards linux (and other OSes as well) than NVIDIA. Sure, with a GeForce you know that the driver is built by the people who built the chipset, but it's closed source, and the NVIDIA driver is the only way to go. ATI releases the specs for all their cards openly (after signing up as a developer) so that any number of people can work on ATI drivers for any number of operating systems. This means that the DRM for a Radeon is included in the 2.4.x kernel series. This means that TV in and TV out and accelerated MPEG playback are (or will be) supported under Linux through the GATOS project.
Personally, I far prefer a company that releases open specs over a company that releases minimally supported closed source drivers.
Technically, a guitar is a percussion instrument too.
Duplicate crash reports .. Not bug reports. Crash reports let them get info on multiple systems with different hardware, software, etc for ONE bug. Multiple bug reports do nothing but waste time.
Shouldn't you have to opt into ads on the freeway?
When you're "navigating" a public area (all terms used quite loosely) you are completely open to being subject to advertising of all shapes and sizes.
virual Windows based machines
Freudian slip?
Is it just me, or do the post and the sig contradict each other? ;)
Sorry, here's the correction: http://rain.dnsalias.net/leahy.html
I have written a letter, to Hollings and to all of my representatives (I'm from VT, so there are three) and I recieved a letter from Sen. Patrick Leahy as well.
I WILL be thinking about this legislation when I vote next time, you can be sure of that.
No, something WILL happen, because in this case, it will be a law that corporations have to abide by. If you look at copyright, it's always by attacking corporations that the copyright holders fight their battle against pirace. Very seldom (if ever) are individuals taken to court for having a few illegal pieces of software or some downloaded MP3s.
The problem comes when a large business has these things, or even worse, distributes them. Look at the Napster case and the pending cases against other P2P software companies. The RIAA/MPAA DO NOT ATTACK INDIVIDUALS. What the CBDTPA will do is make sure that corporations follow the rules by only creating devices that comply with the legislation, therby limiting what a consumer will do. If a company produces a device that does not comply, the RIAA/MPAA are guaranteed to notice, and that comapny is guaranteed to be taken to court.
Legislation IS NOT the answer to this problem - copyright is a job for the courts, on a case by case basis. Copyright is not intended to limit consumer rights, which is what the CBDTPA will do. Copyright exists to protect content creators, but that protection is and should be limited in time and scope.
Regardless of the immediate consequences of Hollings' bill, it will open the door for more and more intrusions on our "right" to fair use (which is more of a historical trend than a right, and it should be treated as such. Fair use does not allow the copying of works we have not paid for or the distribution of copyrighted works to others without consent. In this light, much P2P software use is illegal, which ahs been shown in the courts.). The question is not how this bill, as horrible as it is, will affect us, but what is to come after it. I'm afraid of some day not being able to easily record MY guitar on MY computer without paying/contacting/registering with some central authority. It is in our FUTURE rights that the CBDTPA's true danger lies.
For the first one, though, I have a much bigger problem. Can anyone cite any other [industry / realm / product space] where one is required to retain all receipts in order to prove ownership? I don't need a receipt to show that I own the shirt I'm wearing. If someone wants to accuse me of stealing it, show some evidence. I don't need a receipt to verify that I own the couch in my living room -- if someone thinks I stole it from my neighbor, fine, prove it. So, why on earth do I need a receipt for software?
It seems to me that this would be an issue of burden of proof, and I think you've hit the nail on the head. It's not your responsibility to prove you're innocent. The burden of proof lies on the accuser (I'm using all these terms rather loosely here) to show that you've committed a crime.
Damn, now I think it's even worse than I did at first:P
This may be the case for the AIW 8500 128 (no DV) but I can't say for sure. I know that the AIW7500 uses a different (analog) tv capture circuit than the (digital) 8500DV, if the 8500 sans DV uses the same digital capture device, then it may be safe to assume that it's supported by GATO.
I'm not sure how much suppor there is for the video capture features of the card under Linux right now. However, ATI releases all the specs to their cards so that people like the DRI project can develop drivers for them (which is much cooler IMHO than NVidia's closed drivers). So, while it may take longer for the drivers to mature, they will most likely be free software.
A little off your question...
I've seen a few people complaining about their AIW Radeon's, etc. I just have to say that (owning an AIW 7500) the drivers are much more mature than what they talk about. I've had no problems using the capture functions, no problems with any game (D3D or OpenGL) and it DOES encode to non-proprietary formats (MPEG2, AVI, etc) to allow for editing w/out conversion.
The quality is fantastic (I can't wait till I get somewhere where I have reception). I recommend getting one of these card if TV+good 3D acceleration is your bag.
And this is exactly what the default of copyright law says. If I purchase, download or otherwise procure a copyrighted work, I have no legal right to copy or modify it with the purpose of redistribution. While the quoted section of the GPL makes this blatantly (and I believe wonderfully) clear, it is not needed for that to be the effect.
Jar? More like a house.
Actually, as of 18:08EST they seem to be doing pretty well;)
Ahh, but if I use my handy Tiny Personal Firewall to block that silly GAIN program, it can't talk to its server, so it can't do anything to me... Muahahaha!
Yeah, but I still feel weird when I see Sonic on the Game Cube...