Hard to say anything. They didn't sign any international copyright agreements. And I think Israel's a little to busy with Hamas currently to do anyhing about file traders.
Yes, stealing is illegal. What does that have to do with "keeping" secrets?
You said you have to agree to keep a secret or I'm not obligated to not spread it. I wasn't sure how deep you meant that - and if it applied to situations in which I've illicitly acquired your property or IP. You're right, according to Bart. it doesn't apply to third parties.
Even if Bruce got it from someone who was NDA'd, Bruce wouldn't be liable unless he knowingly colluded the person (say by funding him) to violate the NDA. The California DVD-CCA case is a good one to prove this point.
Interestingly, Bruce went out of his way to show that the got it from someone non-NDA'd. Was he protecting his source there? Or just being extra-careful?
Do you understand that you have to AGREE to keep a secret before somebody has a claim against you for not keeping it?
That's actually not true. If I steal something from them, I'm culpable. Having free speech does not relieve you of the consequences of what you say, or the concepts of libel and slander wouldn't exist. This is a civil matter, not a criminal one, and the first amendment is irrelevant here.
That said, Bruce got the thing from a guy who was, himself, non-NDA'd. So he's not liable.
...is the part where they say they own every bit of code that you ever write, if you've ever licensed any form of unix ever before. Talk about overreaching claims.
Before two long, they're going to claim to have IP rights on my firstborn.
You could make the die the size of a 300mm wafer and your yield would go to zero. I don't know of a process that can produce a wafer without any flaws (typically due to foreign material).
That's certainly true, but there's a lot more wiggle room in terms of increasing effective die size. It isn't usually foreign material per se that is the problem - more frequently, it's from defects in the crystal structure of the Si crystal. There are a number of research groups looking into eradicating these problems (among them, around 6 people in my research group).
But you're right, this isn't strictly available now.
When we absolutely cannot put anymore transistors on a chip, we will start making computers that are massively parrallel. In the future, you will have a desktop computer that will have 2, 4, 8, 16, etc chips on them.
That's pointless. Why would I prefer 8 chips? Wouldn't it make sense to make a die that's 8 times as big? Then, at the same feature size (0.18 or whatever), you get the same number of total transistors in both systems, same area dedicated to CPU per rig, but less slow (ie, FSB) interconnects, allowing for a higher degree of integration. If you're going to invoke the parallel argument, you have to be better than using one chip with the same total area, and that's not the case.
Bottom line is, you could at best tie, if the amount of processing speed per transistor were equal using one or many chips. This isn't the case though - it scales more like log(x) because of the overhead. That's where you lose your tie. Remember, you won't win unless separating one chip into lots of chips is somehow beneficial, which it's not.
Finally, there's no reason we can't do parallel *and* whatever else we were going to do anyway. They're not mutually exclusive.
If anyone still doesn't see it, look at it this way: To keep getting the same performance boost/year we're used to, we would have to *at minimum* double the number of chips in our box every 18 months. This is assuming that power scales linearly with # chips. So, do you want 64 chips in your rig in 9 years? Not really feasible. And remember, Moore's law is the reason you can't keep making them smaller in the first place, so that won't work.
I remembered spending so many hours behind the KB playing Wolf and annoying the crap out of my roomates (PC speaker =])...
You know, to this day I still have no idea what the sounds in that game were supposed to be. I didn't get a sound card until a year or two later.
As far as feeling your age...I'll second that.;)
Yeah, who didn't play...
on
Masters of Doom
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I still have original copies of Doom, Wolf3D, and a handful of Commander Keen, 'cept I always have troubling running the games on my Win2k and WinXP computers. Sometimes the games won't run period, or there will be missing sound (for example).
Wolf3D? That was just about the most groundbreaking game I've ever seen. I remember walking into a computer store one day, and seeing this game that blew my freaking mind. Felt like a friggin' acid trip.
So are there a bunch of yougin's around here who have never played wolf? I think anyone who calls themselves a geek and never played Wolf is a poser, but that's just me. It's like required reading.
SCO might not try to claim that copyright is completely invalid but rather that most of the conditions in the GPL are not reasonable. They could say that since the license grants permission to copy and redistribute that is the end of it and an author cannot put conditions on these grants. Therefore GPL == BSD and when you put BSD together with proprietary code you get a proprietary product that is controlled by the owner of the proprietary code. Of course this could backfire since SCO used the GPL as well which means there code would be BSD as well.
I hope they do, because I could crush that in court and I'm a freaking chemist. I do know, however, that if you find the terms of a contract onerous that you should not sign it. Second, if the terms of a contract are, for whatever reason, found to be invalid, it is invalidated on both sides. Thus, at best (for them) SCO would be C&D's from ever releasing a GPL package in the future.
But history tells us that trends continue until they're forced to change, and I think their history speaks volumes....snip...
And to say that what happens here has no bearing on the world outside of/. is somewhat incorrect - each of these geeks, to some degree or another, has some contact with the outside world and can affect things there. So even if the ripples are small, I think it's important to recognize them.
I'll group these together, and answer by saying that, if the neighborhood geek is to be listened to, he can't just rant indiscriminantly and monotonously. Similarly, history (as you cite) has also taught us that people who continually send the same message regardless of the circumstances or context are marginalized and ignored (PETA, anyone?). I would say the more that/.'ers are listened to, the more we need to be timely and relevant, as opposed to "foaming at the mouth."
So our Chicken Little cries here may be a little premature, but they may yet serve some purpose.
My fear is that it will have the same effect as with the mr. "crying wolf" - ie, no one will listen to us if the sky really falls.
Ultimately, I think it's a strength to be able to talk about your opponent, at some point, without criticizing. Gives some credibility.
What I am somewhat surprised at is that the executive didn't seem to realize the VERY important potential for SMS and the like to improve sales of good movies!
That's an interesting point. Now I'll don the "MPAA -hater" hat, and say that they would rather be able to control what succeeds and what doesn't, so they can maximize and regulate cash intake. This is better (for them!)than having some large-budget bombs mixed with small-budget successes. Also, from a creativity standpoint, it's easier to hype a shitty, expensive movie than to simply make a good movie. They also (possibly until now!) have done better.
Well, if they weren't on record already trying to limit or take away our freedoms , rights, and liberties, I think the/. community would be a little bit kinder.
Obviously, which I granted in my original post. But what we need to understand is 1) they could give two shits if the/. community is kind to them, and 2) the general geek lobby doesn't gain any credibility by turning any story about movies or music into a personal rights debate.
And that's what it comes down to. You have 20,000 flaming idiots on this site who don't read the actual article, reading instead the inflammatory titles posted by (invariably) michael. From this they garner that the industry is certainly attempting to steal their rights to text message someone, when this is preposterous and false.
The actual situation is that some poor exec is wishing for the good old days when they could make money of a shitty movie by promo'ing it. That's all. His job is to make money - his job is now harder. Allowing the poor bastard to be wistful for a moment without calling him a Nazi wouldn't kill us, would it?
Bottom line is I stand by my original point - save the flaming and foaming at the mouth for when something actually happens, stop crying "wolf"/"chicken little," and wait until something actually happens to bitch about the **AA. Or at least until the next SCO story.
And no, I don't need more **AA links. I read them when they come out. I'm no **AA fan (particularly Jack Valenti), but a little objectivity wouldn't kill us as a whole.
So they are saying that communication is the reason for movie's failure?
Yes, they are, and they're probably right.
They should get rid of free speech.
I know that the **AA is just below SCO and M$ on the list of most hated groups around here, but they never advocated anything of the time - it was simply a guy making an observation that their marketing schemes aren't as effective as they used to be. Nothing more. So perhaps we can wait to let loose with our anti-**AA tirades until they do something ro really deserve it. At their rate, that should require approximately three/. stories from now.
Nice to know we will be instituting a "tag and release" program for the homeless. Perhaps if the population is too large for its natural habitat, given the lack of natural predators, we can "thin out their numbers" a bit. Perhaps a "homeless season" for hunting?
What would one use as bait, a coupla 40's or pure-grain?
Now that's funny: I always thought KDE with its 30MB per application memory need and ugly I-wanna-look-like-a-windowsxp-n00b-themes was the environment that has ever since prevented Linux from being taken seriously on the desktop.
I'll give you that - if you're going to knock off a desktop theme, why in God's gname would you do winXP? At least give gnome credit - knocking off MacOSX at least yields a more attractive result.
I'm not sure that there is any point in replying
to you, but in order to demonstrate my vast and
awesome talent for the bleeding obvious, I will
note that you can't "steal" something that is
already *given* to you freely, no matter how hard
you try.
Well you've certainly a talent for that if nothing else. Allow me to introduce you to the concept of figurative language sometime.
But then you`d still need to download a compiler, since windows doesn`t come with a compiler by default.
I miss the good old days when every computer came with a BASIC interpreter and actually encouraged you to learn about it, windows seems to go out of it`s way to keep the users as clueless as possible.
I was kidding. You'll see MS give away source when you see Charlton Heston give up his guns.
No kidding. If MS can't stem piracy over there, what the hell is Stallman going to do to enforce the GPL? I mean, China *really* believes in Free Software!
I can see the slogan now: "China - 1 Billion Free (as in Tsingtao) Software Zealots Can't Be Wrong."
What about the other part - you put $1000 down on Seashell at a hundred to one, and the casino decides not to pay up?
Same law as a casino. They have to have enough liquid assets at all times to cover all active bets.
Anyone who is so nice as to move themselves into US jurisdiction, and after the US government hired people to do it.
They're already going to make US citizens gambling at (by definition) foreign sites illegal. So make foreign gambling illegal, legalize domestic internet gambling, and make them all move onto US soil if they want to continue operations. If anything, you'd just get more control - all the problems you cite occur now, as offshore gambling does currently exist.
Or more generally speaking: 1. We dont need to hire a professional, I saw this done on TLC or the Discovery Channel once. If I put this here......
You know, if you replace "TLC or Discovery Channel" with "Oz" from HBO, that phrase takes on a whole new meaning. So does the word "professional." Hehe.
Huh...you watch a lot of Discovery and TLC. Watch any HGTV as well? Oh, I'm married too.;)
Because in Vegas, there's someone there to check the numbers, to make sure that every payout is what it should be.
First, that argument at least doesn't apply to sports betting, as the casino doesn't have anything they can fudge. Second, even for other games, the online versions could be regulated to - I don't see any reason why not.
Slashdot Mirror
Hard to say anything. They didn't sign any international copyright agreements. And I think Israel's a little to busy with Hamas currently to do anyhing about file traders.
Viva la es5!
You said you have to agree to keep a secret or I'm not obligated to not spread it. I wasn't sure how deep you meant that - and if it applied to situations in which I've illicitly acquired your property or IP. You're right, according to Bart. it doesn't apply to third parties.
Even if Bruce got it from someone who was NDA'd, Bruce wouldn't be liable unless he knowingly colluded the person (say by funding him) to violate the NDA. The California DVD-CCA case is a good one to prove this point.
Interestingly, Bruce went out of his way to show that the got it from someone non-NDA'd. Was he protecting his source there? Or just being extra-careful?
That's actually not true. If I steal something from them, I'm culpable. Having free speech does not relieve you of the consequences of what you say, or the concepts of libel and slander wouldn't exist. This is a civil matter, not a criminal one, and the first amendment is irrelevant here.
That said, Bruce got the thing from a guy who was, himself, non-NDA'd. So he's not liable.
Before two long, they're going to claim to have IP rights on my firstborn.
That's certainly true, but there's a lot more wiggle room in terms of increasing effective die size. It isn't usually foreign material per se that is the problem - more frequently, it's from defects in the crystal structure of the Si crystal. There are a number of research groups looking into eradicating these problems (among them, around 6 people in my research group).
But you're right, this isn't strictly available now.
That's pointless. Why would I prefer 8 chips? Wouldn't it make sense to make a die that's 8 times as big? Then, at the same feature size (0.18 or whatever), you get the same number of total transistors in both systems, same area dedicated to CPU per rig, but less slow (ie, FSB) interconnects, allowing for a higher degree of integration. If you're going to invoke the parallel argument, you have to be better than using one chip with the same total area, and that's not the case.
Bottom line is, you could at best tie, if the amount of processing speed per transistor were equal using one or many chips. This isn't the case though - it scales more like log(x) because of the overhead. That's where you lose your tie. Remember, you won't win unless separating one chip into lots of chips is somehow beneficial, which it's not.
Finally, there's no reason we can't do parallel *and* whatever else we were going to do anyway. They're not mutually exclusive.
If anyone still doesn't see it, look at it this way: To keep getting the same performance boost/year we're used to, we would have to *at minimum* double the number of chips in our box every 18 months. This is assuming that power scales linearly with # chips. So, do you want 64 chips in your rig in 9 years? Not really feasible. And remember, Moore's law is the reason you can't keep making them smaller in the first place, so that won't work.
Tell me about it. My first was a 2400. When it died, I picked up the phone and started whistling. My baud rate went up.
I will say, I do miss the days of old-school BBS's - watching ANSI graphics slooooowly scroll across the screen...
You know, to this day I still have no idea what the sounds in that game were supposed to be. I didn't get a sound card until a year or two later.
As far as feeling your age...I'll second that. ;)
Wolf3D? That was just about the most groundbreaking game I've ever seen. I remember walking into a computer store one day, and seeing this game that blew my freaking mind. Felt like a friggin' acid trip.
So are there a bunch of yougin's around here who have never played wolf? I think anyone who calls themselves a geek and never played Wolf is a poser, but that's just me. It's like required reading.
I hope they do, because I could crush that in court and I'm a freaking chemist. I do know, however, that if you find the terms of a contract onerous that you should not sign it. Second, if the terms of a contract are, for whatever reason, found to be invalid, it is invalidated on both sides. Thus, at best (for them) SCO would be C&D's from ever releasing a GPL package in the future.
I've no hope of completely eradicating the reactionary posting around here, simply suggesting a little selectivity. Baby-steps, you know?
And to say that what happens here has no bearing on the world outside of /. is somewhat incorrect - each of these geeks, to some degree or another, has some contact with the outside world and can affect things there. So even if the ripples are small, I think it's important to recognize them.
I'll group these together, and answer by saying that, if the neighborhood geek is to be listened to, he can't just rant indiscriminantly and monotonously. Similarly, history (as you cite) has also taught us that people who continually send the same message regardless of the circumstances or context are marginalized and ignored (PETA, anyone?). I would say the more that /.'ers are listened to, the more we need to be timely and relevant, as opposed to "foaming at the mouth."
So our Chicken Little cries here may be a little premature, but they may yet serve some purpose.
My fear is that it will have the same effect as with the mr. "crying wolf" - ie, no one will listen to us if the sky really falls.
Ultimately, I think it's a strength to be able to talk about your opponent, at some point, without criticizing. Gives some credibility.
What I am somewhat surprised at is that the executive didn't seem to realize the VERY important potential for SMS and the like to improve sales of good movies!
That's an interesting point. Now I'll don the "MPAA -hater" hat, and say that they would rather be able to control what succeeds and what doesn't, so they can maximize and regulate cash intake. This is better (for them!)than having some large-budget bombs mixed with small-budget successes. Also, from a creativity standpoint, it's easier to hype a shitty, expensive movie than to simply make a good movie. They also (possibly until now!) have done better.
Obviously, which I granted in my original post. But what we need to understand is 1) they could give two shits if the /. community is kind to them, and 2) the general geek lobby doesn't gain any credibility by turning any story about movies or music into a personal rights debate.
And that's what it comes down to. You have 20,000 flaming idiots on this site who don't read the actual article, reading instead the inflammatory titles posted by (invariably) michael. From this they garner that the industry is certainly attempting to steal their rights to text message someone, when this is preposterous and false.
The actual situation is that some poor exec is wishing for the good old days when they could make money of a shitty movie by promo'ing it. That's all. His job is to make money - his job is now harder. Allowing the poor bastard to be wistful for a moment without calling him a Nazi wouldn't kill us, would it?
Bottom line is I stand by my original point - save the flaming and foaming at the mouth for when something actually happens, stop crying "wolf"/"chicken little," and wait until something actually happens to bitch about the **AA. Or at least until the next SCO story.
And no, I don't need more **AA links. I read them when they come out. I'm no **AA fan (particularly Jack Valenti), but a little objectivity wouldn't kill us as a whole.
Yes, they are, and they're probably right.
They should get rid of free speech.
I know that the **AA is just below SCO and M$ on the list of most hated groups around here, but they never advocated anything of the time - it was simply a guy making an observation that their marketing schemes aren't as effective as they used to be. Nothing more. So perhaps we can wait to let loose with our anti-**AA tirades until they do something ro really deserve it. At their rate, that should require approximately three /. stories from now.
What would one use as bait, a coupla 40's or pure-grain?
I'll give you that - if you're going to knock off a desktop theme, why in God's gname would you do winXP? At least give gnome credit - knocking off MacOSX at least yields a more attractive result.
Well you've certainly a talent for that if nothing else. Allow me to introduce you to the concept of figurative language sometime.
Interesting, but only useful if linux stole it from one of the "ancient" unixes, as they specifically reserved the rights to anything like Sys V.
I was kidding. You'll see MS give away source when you see Charlton Heston give up his guns.
No kidding. If MS can't stem piracy over there, what the hell is Stallman going to do to enforce the GPL? I mean, China *really* believes in Free Software!
I can see the slogan now: "China - 1 Billion Free (as in Tsingtao) Software Zealots Can't Be Wrong."
Well, source is a lot smaller than binaries. Huh? Oh. ;)
Same law as a casino. They have to have enough liquid assets at all times to cover all active bets.
Anyone who is so nice as to move themselves into US jurisdiction, and after the US government hired people to do it.
They're already going to make US citizens gambling at (by definition) foreign sites illegal. So make foreign gambling illegal, legalize domestic internet gambling, and make them all move onto US soil if they want to continue operations. If anything, you'd just get more control - all the problems you cite occur now, as offshore gambling does currently exist.
You know, if you replace "TLC or Discovery Channel" with "Oz" from HBO, that phrase takes on a whole new meaning. So does the word "professional." Hehe.
Huh...you watch a lot of Discovery and TLC. Watch any HGTV as well? Oh, I'm married too. ;)
First, that argument at least doesn't apply to sports betting, as the casino doesn't have anything they can fudge. Second, even for other games, the online versions could be regulated to - I don't see any reason why not.
5) Mike Tyson sounds like a girl.
4) Honey, that's just the PMS talking.
3) [Redneck accent]Hey y'all, watch this...
2) Betcha can't...
1) We'll save a lot of money by not hiring an electrician...
'Nuff said.