It's not even the extensions I have a problem with. I have a problem with them being retroactive and applied to works that were created under terms and conditions that apparently were perfectly fine at the time to create said works.
It will be out on blu-ray in a few months, then I can download it. I actually could even afford the prices they ask, I just refuse to -- I don't give to charities either.
Oh... you expect us, who have been f*cked over by copyrights holders, to be reasonable and accept these terms? Let's start with 3 months of copyright and no DRM at all, then we'll talk.
We're perfectly with this status quo. We get what we want for free, while these greedy bastards have this nice illusion of control.
The decision is the same. You brake. How hard you brake depends on traffic behind you. A good driver always knows if there is something behind them, so no need to check the rear view mirror before braking (you should have checked it 10 seconds ago already).
I certainly would not endanger my live and the live of those behind me because a deer/kid/granny is in a spot they donot belong.
Wow...and you never thought that maybe it should be "harmonized" the other way around? What's next? Some backward country has 90 years of protection and that is just unfair to european perfomers so they should get 90 years too?
What's worse is that it is RETROACTIVE. It has NOTHING to do with encouraging new artists to produce new works and everything to do with lining a dying industries' pockets.
And the problem is that it is actually nature. In nature, animals have lots of offspring to ensure some survive. Many will die of starvation, but having lots of offspring means that you are more likely to have some that makes the cut.
Same goes for humans, except when 18 million humans die of starvation it's suddenly a problem and not nature.
Ok, ok, I'll tell you my password: "But first, I want to say that I think this court is a sham, that the judge does it with and the 'ladies' and 'gentlemen' of the jury worship satan."
Ok, we can make this a bit more complicated. Suppose the passphrase is tatooed on a murder victim that you buried somewhere. You donot actually KNOW the passphrase. Can you be compelled to give the location of the body?
Oh, it's just a fact. Like, where a body is buried.. or, what did you do with the gun? Also, simple facts. You might as well force defendants to confess their crime if you start forcing "facts" out of them.
...and that's why you should have just given him a copy of the DVD instead. Untraceable and you donot feed the wallets that make bills like this possible.
Actually, all you need to cache is meta-data and small files (say anything less than 100 kB). Anything larger (assuming it is unfragmented) can be streamed from a traditional harddisk at speeds comparable to SSD's anyway.
Large files are almost by definition rarely accessed randomly as they are usually some kind of media (image, music, video).
Also, at today's data density, even traditional harddisks can saturate a link as long as the reads are sequential.
In practice, most users find that width is more important than height. You have two documents.
You have a poor conception of what the most common use-case is.
Generally, users have ONE document. A wide-screen format therefore leaves them having it sitting open in Word, with two big bars on either side that contain nothing (while ribbon's, taskbars, etc, eat up their precious vertical space).
Wow... so you're telling me the entire history of the 2.6 line is getting out of hand, yet is still far smaller than my personal "play" repository? It's not even 1 GB...
Don't forget to also give your people only CRT monitors, as those are harder to make good snapshots off. With LCD's it's trivial to take a good picture of a document.
Locking down USB ports is totally ineffective. Not to mention that you'd need to get PS/2 mouses and keyboards, and even those ports could be used for transfer of documents with some effort.
To be secure, you'd need to:
Remove all physical access to the box, as otherwise you open yourself up to big security holes like just cloning an entire harddrive full of documents, attaching a recorder to the VGA output, using the network with a different machine (which uses the credentials of the locked down box), etcetera.
Having removed physical access to the box, (including being unable to splice any of the cables leading to monitor or mouse/keyboard), you'd need to make sure that only a white-list of websites can be visited, and they cannot include any websites that allow users to mail or post on forums.
Your firewall must be set up to only allow access to those sites, and only using http(s); furthermore, DNS should only be allowed to white listed locations (they often leave this wide open).
Then finally, you should remove the user monitor as it woild allow then to take snapshots with their phone (or button camera).
Now I'm sure I've forgotten numerous other vectors of attack, but this should get your started.
You mean Oracle has proven that is a bloated piece of 1970's code that needs handholding at every turn? Even behind fat abstraction layers Oracle manages to leak through and annoy everyone with its ridiculous restrictions and stupid optimizer decisions. Oracle is like x86's; but atleast those were actually improved over the years and eventually became a fairly nice and modern architecture.
It's abundantly clear they donot care, as long as they can sell expensive support contracts and bill you by the CPU.
That's not needed at all. This article makes it sound like it is impossible to create a fast responding UI. Good practices will result in a responsive UI.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not even the extensions I have a problem with. I have a problem with them being retroactive and applied to works that were created under terms and conditions that apparently were perfectly fine at the time to create said works.
It will be out on blu-ray in a few months, then I can download it. I actually could even afford the prices they ask, I just refuse to -- I don't give to charities either.
Oh... you expect us, who have been f*cked over by copyrights holders, to be reasonable and accept these terms? Let's start with 3 months of copyright and no DRM at all, then we'll talk.
We're perfectly with this status quo. We get what we want for free, while these greedy bastards have this nice illusion of control.
The decision is the same. You brake. How hard you brake depends on traffic behind you. A good driver always knows if there is something behind them, so no need to check the rear view mirror before braking (you should have checked it 10 seconds ago already).
I certainly would not endanger my live and the live of those behind me because a deer/kid/granny is in a spot they donot belong.
Wow...and you never thought that maybe it should be "harmonized" the other way around? What's next? Some backward country has 90 years of protection and that is just unfair to european perfomers so they should get 90 years too?
What's worse is that it is RETROACTIVE. It has NOTHING to do with encouraging new artists to produce new works and everything to do with lining a dying industries' pockets.
Just means you have to drive even faster to make up for those extra 30 seconds of wait.
If you are talking about holland, I think that our car use subsidizes your public transport.
Once you own car, you are gonna use it. Make owning a car cheaper and congestion will only get worse.
And it is all based on the faulty assumption that people enjoy rushhour traffic and could easily avoid it.
And the problem is that it is actually nature. In nature, animals have lots of offspring to ensure some survive. Many will die of starvation, but having lots of offspring means that you are more likely to have some that makes the cut.
Same goes for humans, except when 18 million humans die of starvation it's suddenly a problem and not nature.
Ok, ok, I'll tell you my password: "But first, I want to say that I think this court is a sham, that the judge does it with and the 'ladies' and 'gentlemen' of the jury worship satan."
"You only have to type the location of the body into this machine..."
Ok, we can make this a bit more complicated. Suppose the passphrase is tatooed on a murder victim that you buried somewhere. You donot actually KNOW the passphrase. Can you be compelled to give the location of the body?
Oh, it's just a fact. Like, where a body is buried.. or, what did you do with the gun? Also, simple facts. You might as well force defendants to confess their crime if you start forcing "facts" out of them.
So, the passphrase should contain whatever it tries to hide, and you'll get immunity from it...
...and that's why you should have just given him a copy of the DVD instead. Untraceable and you donot feed the wallets that make bills like this possible.
I'm not feeling bad for sony yet.
Please continue.
Actually, all you need to cache is meta-data and small files (say anything less than 100 kB). Anything larger (assuming it is unfragmented) can be streamed from a traditional harddisk at speeds comparable to SSD's anyway.
Large files are almost by definition rarely accessed randomly as they are usually some kind of media (image, music, video).
Also, at today's data density, even traditional harddisks can saturate a link as long as the reads are sequential.
I agree, it's more likely to get worse than they currently predict.
You have a poor conception of what the most common use-case is.
Generally, users have ONE document. A wide-screen format therefore leaves them having it sitting open in Word, with two big bars on either side that contain nothing (while ribbon's, taskbars, etc, eat up their precious vertical space).
Wow... so you're telling me the entire history of the 2.6 line is getting out of hand, yet is still far smaller than my personal "play" repository? It's not even 1 GB...
Don't forget to also give your people only CRT monitors, as those are harder to make good snapshots off. With LCD's it's trivial to take a good picture of a document.
Locking down USB ports is totally ineffective. Not to mention that you'd need to get PS/2 mouses and keyboards, and even those ports could be used for transfer of documents with some effort.
To be secure, you'd need to:
Remove all physical access to the box, as otherwise you open yourself up to big security holes like just cloning an entire harddrive full of documents, attaching a recorder to the VGA output, using the network with a different machine (which uses the credentials of the locked down box), etcetera.
Having removed physical access to the box, (including being unable to splice any of the cables leading to monitor or mouse/keyboard), you'd need to make sure that only a white-list of websites can be visited, and they cannot include any websites that allow users to mail or post on forums.
Your firewall must be set up to only allow access to those sites, and only using http(s); furthermore, DNS should only be allowed to white listed locations (they often leave this wide open).
Then finally, you should remove the user monitor as it woild allow then to take snapshots with their phone (or button camera).
Now I'm sure I've forgotten numerous other vectors of attack, but this should get your started.
What rights am I signing away by doing this?
You mean Oracle has proven that is a bloated piece of 1970's code that needs handholding at every turn? Even behind fat abstraction layers Oracle manages to leak through and annoy everyone with its ridiculous restrictions and stupid optimizer decisions. Oracle is like x86's; but atleast those were actually improved over the years and eventually became a fairly nice and modern architecture.
It's abundantly clear they donot care, as long as they can sell expensive support contracts and bill you by the CPU.
Oracle wins contracts on marketing alone, period.
That's not needed at all. This article makes it sound like it is impossible to create a fast responding UI. Good practices will result in a responsive UI.
I blame users with ridiculous demands, like demanding that every application be "themable" etc...