I think they still should have something. I mean, the "inventions" we're talking about here are nothign of the kind. They're just ideas with no practical anything behind them...Like, I'm going to patent "Holographic optical email display interfaces that use retinal focus for navigation" *Patent patent patent*
Okay, I'm done. Now, when someone actually invents that, I own it because I thought of it first? How does that follow? I can sit around and pull stuff outta my ass all day long, do no more investment in it than it costs to get a patent, then sue the people who put zillions of dollars and tens of thousands of manhours into developing it, and that is somehow legit?
All that does is make corporations unwilling to invest in new tech, for fear some stupid patent troll who has a patent on the fricking XOR gate will come along and sue them for *cue Dr. Evil voice* One billion dollars!
There is no legal punishment sufficient for NTP...I'm thinking dark alleys, big angry nerds (with overdeveloped Crackberry thumb muscles) wielding boards studded with nails.
One of the common warnings on radio transmission equipment is "May cause spontaneous body heating" eg, don't hang out here, or you may cook.
I remember climbing up a tower to mount an antenna after reading that, looking at all the other antenna's and microwave plates that were mounted there...Now that will mess with your mind.
Well, personally, it pisses me off that it's illegal at all. And then it pisses me off that the RIAA are apprently the governments enforcement arm, when it comes to copyright violation. And I hate the RIAA, just because I think they're a pure evil leech latched onto an industry to could survive perfectly well without them.
But, all that being said, if they're actually going to be enforcing this stupid law, then they should be enforcing it against the people who are breaking the rules (filesharers) and not the people who are making filesharing possible.
It's not questionable. That's like saying the postal service is "questionable" because illegal things make it into the mail. Is the telephone network questionable because you can call criminals, or plan an illegal activity? Are fricking lightwaves questionable because you can see things you're not supposed to see?
No, in fact, it's not questionable. Copyright infringement is illegal, therefore illegal stuff has made it into a perfectly normal information conduit. This is not the conduit's fault, it is the fault of the individuals who are putting the material on there.
The "War" on Terrorism is self-sustaining and unwinnnable. If we wait for it to end, we may be waiting for an ideological shift that is never going to happen.
This is totally obvious. Of course we weren't hugely bad-ass solo hunters! We lack the natural tools for it, and weapons are an outgrowth of a society that has enough surplus food to allow time to develop technology. Therefore, we'd managed to carve ourselves out a niche in the food chain before we started developing the advantages that allowed us to dominate.
And even today individuals are occasionally killed by wild animal attacks. Why the hell would they imagine it was any different in the past?
Eh. I bought a PS2 this year (gift), and a cousin of mine got one for xmas...on the other hand, I don't know anyone who has a 360...Obviously not scientific, but does seem suggestive.
They always say stuff like this. The old systems were limited because you could never have more than x number of vacuum tubes. Then it went to chips, and there was always some reason why the chip couldn't get any bigger or denser or hotter...and there always turned out to be another way.
So now we can't have more gates than there are atoms...but what if we're using subatomic particles, so that one atom's worth of particles can comprise multiple gates? What if we find some way to move beyond gates, so that we have an increase in capability coupled with a decrease in mass?
I'm not arguing for the perpetual truth of Moore's Law, but don't fall into the trap of assuming that future techniques are going to be limited by our current understanding.
Barring a few stupid corporations (*cough* Diebold *cough*), most ATMs accept extremely limited input, and have a very narrow range of possible actions they can take with that input, so there really isn't much to gain by hacking an ATM, and no real way to do it, because it's not really set up for that, and isn't running other, exploitable, services.
Now, those Diebold machines that run Windows, on the other hand...I've seen screenshots of those things after a bluescreen, with the browser up, and the media player going. I'd bet there was a way to get them to spit out their complete internal cash supply. That's a good 250k, if it's full. Can you insert a buffer overflow on the back of an ATM card?
<geek> I'd say that Lawful Evil is an overstatement. If being good will bring them profits, they'll be good. They don't give a damn one way or the other. The same with obedience to laws. True Neutral all the way baby. </geek>
Your analogy would seem to suggest that currently, software that runs on intel does not run equally well on amd, which is not, in fact, the case. This is more analogous to lexmark's print cartridge scam where their printers refused to use cartridges manufactured by competitiors simply because they WERE managed by competitors.
In this situation, intel is offering incentives to a software manufacturer to cripple their product on a competitors hardware. I agree that a competing product could be released that didn't have this arbitrary restriction, but I think it is clearly anti-competitive behavior that it was released in the first place.
I think it's pretty clearly anticompetitive, when you're pushing someone to write software that is specifically noncompliant with a competitors hardware.
If I were Intel I would have waited until that particular competitor was no longer suing me for anti-competitive behavior before adding more weight to their argument...But that's just me.
From the submission: "The findings support the argument for global warming as a result of human interference rather than natural climate change."
As opposed to: "The researchers think their work bolsters the case that global warming due to human activity has created a change in climate unlike anything seen in more than a millennium"."
When I type Define::bolster into google, the first word in the first definition is "Support".
Seems pretty accurate to me, although the use of the word "interference" in the summary is more pejorative than "activity" from the article.
Lol! I actually DO meet those technical qualifications, but alas, I live in Georgia, where someone with those credentials could command 16, or even 17 dollars an hour...It's true!
If it weren't for the recording industry, there wouldn't even BE music. They and they alone make it possible for music to exist, and should they go away, or should their profit margins drop below 100%, all music will cease to exist. Radio stations will play nothing but silence and talk radio, and not popular, syndicated talk radio, but the crappy local kind. The world will be plunged into a musical dark age, worse even than the pre-alternative 90's. So for the love of music and all things musical, go out and buy a massively DRM encumbered CD today! Better yet, buy two...for the alternative is unthinkable!
Blow me, not only did I read it, I passed it around the office where we read parts of it aloud to each other and laughed. THERE IS NO REASON THOSE NUMBERS SHOULD HAVE EVER BEEN PRINTED OUT. I don't care WHAT kind of hung jobs they had.
If I walked into the printer room and found someone printing out lists of credit card numbers he'd be fired, and THAT is only if I thought it was some kinda mistake. If I thought anything else, I'd have his ass arrested.
There is no possible legitimate purpose in printing that sort of information to hardcopy. If the routinely do that in Boston, they are effing morons.
Just in case you're not trolling, I'll bite. Mismanagement is running an industry (print media) that regularly sees 20-30% profit margins (on par with drug companies), and claiming, at the same time, that money is too tight to pay carriers mileage that covers gas prices, or to employ a staff anywhere near the size it would take to produce a first rate product.
I'm not explaining the billing system, I'm just saying why the numbers are available at all.
The way it works here is pretty similar to what you're talking about. Each customer has a unique ID. Now somewhere in the system that ID is connected to their credit card number (if they pay with it), but that part is never accessed by any reporting features. It's just sourced every time a billing request is generated by a weekly billing job in another part of the system. That job runs a charge on the card, and marks down the payment in another area, referenced by the customer ID and containing the date, amount, and transaction ID.
There are two people here who have a high enough level of access to the system to write a report that would merge credit card and user data in a printable form. There are maybe three others who could look up any card they chose, but they couldn't generate any kind of report containing multiple cards. All the printers connected to that system are in a physically secure area.
Basically we never do anything with the credit card number but generate billing with it. It's on no reports. Why would it be? What legitimate use is the credit card number to anyone except the authorized user? I passed the article around down here in the basement, and we all had a good laugh about it (first time we've been happy not to be the globe...heh), and none of us can even IMAGINE a scenario where printed lists of credit cards would be useful for any legitimate purpose.
If you can't raise the salary...Your corporate management is a bunch of money grubbing assbandits who are out for nothing but lining their own pockets...
Woops. Typo. I meant to type "it's a complicated issue." The keys are all right next to each other.
Slashdot Mirror
Yep. Recently had to reinstall Windows because of the errors that kept cropping up after I uninstalled Norton...Screwed the MBR six ways to sunday.
I think they still should have something. I mean, the "inventions" we're talking about here are nothign of the kind. They're just ideas with no practical anything behind them...Like, I'm going to patent "Holographic optical email display interfaces that use retinal focus for navigation" *Patent patent patent*
Okay, I'm done. Now, when someone actually invents that, I own it because I thought of it first? How does that follow? I can sit around and pull stuff outta my ass all day long, do no more investment in it than it costs to get a patent, then sue the people who put zillions of dollars and tens of thousands of manhours into developing it, and that is somehow legit?
All that does is make corporations unwilling to invest in new tech, for fear some stupid patent troll who has a patent on the fricking XOR gate will come along and sue them for *cue Dr. Evil voice* One billion dollars!
There is no legal punishment sufficient for NTP...I'm thinking dark alleys, big angry nerds (with overdeveloped Crackberry thumb muscles) wielding boards studded with nails.
One of the common warnings on radio transmission equipment is "May cause spontaneous body heating" eg, don't hang out here, or you may cook.
I remember climbing up a tower to mount an antenna after reading that, looking at all the other antenna's and microwave plates that were mounted there...Now that will mess with your mind.
What? You didn't run it as root? Of course it didn't work! ;)
Well, personally, it pisses me off that it's illegal at all. And then it pisses me off that the RIAA are apprently the governments enforcement arm, when it comes to copyright violation. And I hate the RIAA, just because I think they're a pure evil leech latched onto an industry to could survive perfectly well without them.
But, all that being said, if they're actually going to be enforcing this stupid law, then they should be enforcing it against the people who are breaking the rules (filesharers) and not the people who are making filesharing possible.
It's not questionable. That's like saying the postal service is "questionable" because illegal things make it into the mail. Is the telephone network questionable because you can call criminals, or plan an illegal activity? Are fricking lightwaves questionable because you can see things you're not supposed to see?
No, in fact, it's not questionable. Copyright infringement is illegal, therefore illegal stuff has made it into a perfectly normal information conduit. This is not the conduit's fault, it is the fault of the individuals who are putting the material on there.
End of story.
The "War" on Terrorism is self-sustaining and unwinnnable. If we wait for it to end, we may be waiting for an ideological shift that is never going to happen.
Ha! I forgot about the death counter! I played it over and over trying to get through it without dying, just for bragging rights.
This is totally obvious. Of course we weren't hugely bad-ass solo hunters! We lack the natural tools for it, and weapons are an outgrowth of a society that has enough surplus food to allow time to develop technology. Therefore, we'd managed to carve ourselves out a niche in the food chain before we started developing the advantages that allowed us to dominate.
And even today individuals are occasionally killed by wild animal attacks. Why the hell would they imagine it was any different in the past?
Eh. I bought a PS2 this year (gift), and a cousin of mine got one for xmas...on the other hand, I don't know anyone who has a 360...Obviously not scientific, but does seem suggestive.
They always say stuff like this. The old systems were limited because you could never have more than x number of vacuum tubes. Then it went to chips, and there was always some reason why the chip couldn't get any bigger or denser or hotter...and there always turned out to be another way.
So now we can't have more gates than there are atoms...but what if we're using subatomic particles, so that one atom's worth of particles can comprise multiple gates? What if we find some way to move beyond gates, so that we have an increase in capability coupled with a decrease in mass?
I'm not arguing for the perpetual truth of Moore's Law, but don't fall into the trap of assuming that future techniques are going to be limited by our current understanding.
I always thought that was overrated. A lawful person doesn't necessarily care about laws...He may just fear the consequences of breaking laws.
True neutral could just as easily be someone who is completely amoral.
Barring a few stupid corporations (*cough* Diebold *cough*), most ATMs accept extremely limited input, and have a very narrow range of possible actions they can take with that input, so there really isn't much to gain by hacking an ATM, and no real way to do it, because it's not really set up for that, and isn't running other, exploitable, services.
Now, those Diebold machines that run Windows, on the other hand...I've seen screenshots of those things after a bluescreen, with the browser up, and the media player going. I'd bet there was a way to get them to spit out their complete internal cash supply. That's a good 250k, if it's full. Can you insert a buffer overflow on the back of an ATM card?
<geek>
I'd say that Lawful Evil is an overstatement. If being good will bring them profits, they'll be good. They don't give a damn one way or the other. The same with obedience to laws. True Neutral all the way baby.
</geek>
Your analogy would seem to suggest that currently, software that runs on intel does not run equally well on amd, which is not, in fact, the case. This is more analogous to lexmark's print cartridge scam where their printers refused to use cartridges manufactured by competitiors simply because they WERE managed by competitors.
In this situation, intel is offering incentives to a software manufacturer to cripple their product on a competitors hardware. I agree that a competing product could be released that didn't have this arbitrary restriction, but I think it is clearly anti-competitive behavior that it was released in the first place.
I think it's pretty clearly anticompetitive, when you're pushing someone to write software that is specifically noncompliant with a competitors hardware.
If I were Intel I would have waited until that particular competitor was no longer suing me for anti-competitive behavior before adding more weight to their argument...But that's just me.
What's inaccurate in the submission?
From the submission: "The findings support the argument for global warming as a result of human interference rather than natural climate change."
As opposed to: "The researchers think their work bolsters the case that global warming due to human activity has created a change in climate unlike anything seen in more than a millennium"."
When I type Define::bolster into google, the first word in the first definition is "Support".
Seems pretty accurate to me, although the use of the word "interference" in the summary is more pejorative than "activity" from the article.
Lol! I actually DO meet those technical qualifications, but alas, I live in Georgia, where someone with those credentials could command 16, or even 17 dollars an hour...It's true!
In South Carolina, and this isn't actually a joke, the age of consent is fourteen...with your parents permission.
It's 18 otherwise. Made for many many "Do you have a note from your parents?" jokes when I was in high school.
Yup you're naive.
If it weren't for the recording industry, there wouldn't even BE music. They and they alone make it possible for music to exist, and should they go away, or should their profit margins drop below 100%, all music will cease to exist. Radio stations will play nothing but silence and talk radio, and not popular, syndicated talk radio, but the crappy local kind. The world will be plunged into a musical dark age, worse even than the pre-alternative 90's. So for the love of music and all things musical, go out and buy a massively DRM encumbered CD today! Better yet, buy two...for the alternative is unthinkable!
Good thing they're not as evil as that "Ubisoft" company.
Blow me, not only did I read it, I passed it around the office where we read parts of it aloud to each other and laughed. THERE IS NO REASON THOSE NUMBERS SHOULD HAVE EVER BEEN PRINTED OUT. I don't care WHAT kind of hung jobs they had.
If I walked into the printer room and found someone printing out lists of credit card numbers he'd be fired, and THAT is only if I thought it was some kinda mistake. If I thought anything else, I'd have his ass arrested.
There is no possible legitimate purpose in printing that sort of information to hardcopy. If the routinely do that in Boston, they are effing morons.
How is executive mismanagement different from a broken business model? Is that a trick question?
Just in case you're not trolling, I'll bite. Mismanagement is running an industry (print media) that regularly sees 20-30% profit margins (on par with drug companies), and claiming, at the same time, that money is too tight to pay carriers mileage that covers gas prices, or to employ a staff anywhere near the size it would take to produce a first rate product.
That's the difference.
I'm not explaining the billing system, I'm just saying why the numbers are available at all.
The way it works here is pretty similar to what you're talking about. Each customer has a unique ID. Now somewhere in the system that ID is connected to their credit card number (if they pay with it), but that part is never accessed by any reporting features. It's just sourced every time a billing request is generated by a weekly billing job in another part of the system. That job runs a charge on the card, and marks down the payment in another area, referenced by the customer ID and containing the date, amount, and transaction ID.
There are two people here who have a high enough level of access to the system to write a report that would merge credit card and user data in a printable form. There are maybe three others who could look up any card they chose, but they couldn't generate any kind of report containing multiple cards. All the printers connected to that system are in a physically secure area.
Basically we never do anything with the credit card number but generate billing with it. It's on no reports. Why would it be? What legitimate use is the credit card number to anyone except the authorized user? I passed the article around down here in the basement, and we all had a good laugh about it (first time we've been happy not to be the globe...heh), and none of us can even IMAGINE a scenario where printed lists of credit cards would be useful for any legitimate purpose.
If you can't raise the salary...Your corporate management is a bunch of money grubbing assbandits who are out for nothing but lining their own pockets...
Woops. Typo. I meant to type "it's a complicated issue." The keys are all right next to each other.