...but is this really the message we want people to have of the tech community in this, the season of sharing? Imagine how much power 22,000 christmas lights are gobbling up!
With the USA poised to enter into a large-scale war with iraq to secure the world's supply of oil, shouldn't the brightest minds in the tech-oriented community be working toward reducing our reliance on fossil fuels, rather than expending electricitiy in yet another cool hey-look-at-me stunt?
Why not instead build some cool snow sculptures in the front yard next year? Just a thought...
By focusing on phonemes rather than syllables or whole words, this software can operate independent of any one languange. This has exciting implications not just for audio searching, but implies a strong beginning for voice-recognition and even speech translation software.
I just hope one of those nuisance lawsuits from Tzsvestaeya Zolskovova, the eccentric widow of Sergei Zolskovova, (Russian lunguist who coined the word phoneme) over the use of the term "phoneme" doesn't hobble progress in this fascinating area.
The whole controversy over Gnutella 2 is being hashed out over on the GDF message boards. Basically, complaints are that Mike is coopting the Gnutella name for his own benefit, and is not bieng forthcoming with the details of the protocol. Some quotes:
Raphael Manfred:"I'm speaking only for myself here, but I will NOT support Mike's protocol
unless I'm forced to do it. I was neutral-positive when this saga
started, but Mike ruined it all by his stubborn attitude, and I'm now
rather hostile-negative.
If there are good ideas in what he did, you can rest assure that we'll
end up using them. He'll even get credit for those ideas, but it will
be within the Gnutella network."
"tonygeek":I am sceptical. All signs are there that (Gnutella 2) is one strictly
commercially driven undertaking/experiment (possibly by a very large
company pulling all the strings from behind) and that somebody wants
to experiment with his own network attached to one that is already up
and functional.
"fungusbuttocks": I am another who is against Mike's use of the "Gnutella 2" name,
because he simply did it as a marketing strategy (...) If Mike releases a nicely documented unambiguous protocol doc when
he's finished testing the beta, and the protocol appears to have some
sort of mathematical merit to it, we should support the protocol.
Looks like the situation's less one-sided than the writeup makes it seem.
I noticed the comments of Barry Klawans, and want to talk about it because I have heard this argument before and think it is poorly thought out and unpersuasive.
The summary of Klawans' comments runs as follows:
The inability to create noninfringing copies of musical works can lead to the loss of works that are not commercially successful. Permanent barriers to creating noninfringing copies goes far beyond the constitutional copyright protection that protects works "by securing for limited times
In his comments, Klawans makes reference to old Jazz 78 rpm records that he has transfered to CD, AND which he says record companies will not reissue because they are not profitable.
This argument is strongly flawed. First, the preservation of art form has little to do with profitability and everything to do with art lover's willingness to preserve those forms. History is full of examples of obscure books, art, and music that have been preserved while more popular (profitable) works fell by the wayside.
Furthermore, the proper way to preserve musical recordings like 78 rpm records is to preserve the means of playing those records. For example. 78 rpm record players are still readily available, they just take some work to find. Putting these recordings on P2P networks for anyone to download just denies descendants of the original artists of those recordings their rightful royalties.
I'm in favor of fair use, but no progress will be made against the DMCA's overly restrictive policies by using bad logic.
Remember that Microsoft is presently forcing corporations to accept the terms of XP licenses, even if they want to keep running non XP OS's like Win2k or even Windows 98. Since the XP license prohibits the use of Open Source software like BOCHS (or anything GPL'd) on corporate desktops, this cuts off a lot of BOCHS uses for businesses, unless they want to run a bunch of WIndows 95 apps.
So you pay 50 dollars to get a jpg of a celestial phenomenon. Why bother, when there are plenty of much better quality images of pretty much the whole sky (not to mention Hubble pictures, etc) to be downloaded for free? It's not like you can photograph the crab nebula from different angles or something.
The FCC doesn't pass regulations for no good reason. , so as long as folks use after-market antennas and no one files any complaints, the FCC isn't looking to imply cut back on allowable bandwidth. Wide bandwidth spectrum can be used by many users for diffeent reasons. For example, in urban areas, some of the users may be hospitals utilizing heart monitors.
Slashdot Mirror
With the USA poised to enter into a large-scale war with iraq to secure the world's supply of oil, shouldn't the brightest minds in the tech-oriented community be working toward reducing our reliance on fossil fuels, rather than expending electricitiy in yet another cool hey-look-at-me stunt?
Why not instead build some cool snow sculptures in the front yard next year? Just a thought...
I just hope one of those nuisance lawsuits from Tzsvestaeya Zolskovova, the eccentric widow of Sergei Zolskovova, (Russian lunguist who coined the word phoneme) over the use of the term "phoneme" doesn't hobble progress in this fascinating area.
Raphael Manfred: "I'm speaking only for myself here, but I will NOT support Mike's protocol unless I'm forced to do it. I was neutral-positive when this saga started, but Mike ruined it all by his stubborn attitude, and I'm now rather hostile-negative.
If there are good ideas in what he did, you can rest assure that we'll end up using them. He'll even get credit for those ideas, but it will be within the Gnutella network."
"tonygeek": I am sceptical. All signs are there that (Gnutella 2) is one strictly commercially driven undertaking/experiment (possibly by a very large company pulling all the strings from behind) and that somebody wants to experiment with his own network attached to one that is already up and functional.
"fungusbuttocks": I am another who is against Mike's use of the "Gnutella 2" name, because he simply did it as a marketing strategy (...)
If Mike releases a nicely documented unambiguous protocol doc when he's finished testing the beta, and the protocol appears to have some sort of mathematical merit to it, we should support the protocol.
Looks like the situation's less one-sided than the writeup makes it seem.
The summary of Klawans' comments runs as follows:
In his comments, Klawans makes reference to old Jazz 78 rpm records that he has transfered to CD, AND which he says record companies will not reissue because they are not profitable.This argument is strongly flawed. First, the preservation of art form has little to do with profitability and everything to do with art lover's willingness to preserve those forms. History is full of examples of obscure books, art, and music that have been preserved while more popular (profitable) works fell by the wayside.
Furthermore, the proper way to preserve musical recordings like 78 rpm records is to preserve the means of playing those records. For example. 78 rpm record players are still readily available, they just take some work to find. Putting these recordings on P2P networks for anyone to download just denies descendants of the original artists of those recordings their rightful royalties.
I'm in favor of fair use, but no progress will be made against the DMCA's overly restrictive policies by using bad logic.
Remember that Microsoft is presently forcing corporations to accept the terms of XP licenses, even if they want to keep running non XP OS's like Win2k or even Windows 98. Since the XP license prohibits the use of Open Source software like BOCHS (or anything GPL'd) on corporate desktops, this cuts off a lot of BOCHS uses for businesses, unless they want to run a bunch of WIndows 95 apps.
So you pay 50 dollars to get a jpg of a celestial phenomenon. Why bother, when there are plenty of much better quality images of pretty much the whole sky (not to mention Hubble pictures, etc) to be downloaded for free? It's not like you can photograph the crab nebula from different angles or something.
The FCC doesn't pass regulations for no good reason. , so as long as folks use after-market antennas and no one files any complaints, the FCC isn't looking to imply cut back on allowable bandwidth. Wide bandwidth spectrum can be used by many users for diffeent reasons. For example, in urban areas, some of the users may be hospitals utilizing heart monitors.