First of all, you agree to the TOS, and if you break the TOS Apple can sanction you according to the TOS. You do however not break any contract.
But that has already been discussed.
What I'd like to add is that you can hardly consider something non-negotiable a contract. A contract is there as a mutual agreement between two parts and whether or not it is written or oral a contract of any worth is negotiable before signing / agreeing.
The heirs to the man who coined the mathematical term "thousand" are suing the publishers of a book named "One Thousand and a Night".
The spokesman representing the heirs said in a press conference: "The publishers of this book, sure brought lots of attention to the word that was invented some time ago, but the publishers have failed to give credits to the true inventor of the word. We have no other option than to sue!"
"The reason why so few people publish their work is because most people understand that online digital music sale NEEDS DRM to survive as a business model."
Since no one have proven this, it is not possible to draw these conclusions.
I know several people who would gladly buy music online if it were DRM-free. So while some may share what they bought on the Internet or to friends, there will be additional sales as well. The most interesting thing about iTMS is the availability and that alone will sell lots of music.
I personally will not buy into a technology that binds me to a platform (I have used Macs all my life (almost), but I refuse to be locked to the platform) and I certainly will not buy into a technology such as this if Apple doesn't guarantee that if they shutdown the iTMS they will release a tool to free the songs that I have bought.
About the routers. I 'd reckon that it would be horrible if an ISP used this, but they won't. The functionality will be used buy larger organisations that register MAC-adresses for any computer that is supposed to be allowed access to the Internet anyway. It really isn't that bad. However, it is bad if you consider the vendor lock-in of anti virus sw, but I would suppose that it is user configurable.
TCPA is not evil in itself, it is just a chip in which you can store private encryption keys. It is some of the potential uses of this technology that is evil. TCPA is however useless since all it does is to hide encryption keys, and I can do that by "chown root keys; chmod 400 keys", in a properly configured system.
Actually, there is a standard for MPEG4-DRM, this mandates that the aac-atom is named enca and is encrypted with AES-128. Apple however named the atom drms, although I do believe that is the only difference as iTunes use the same encryption algorithm.
Technically your comment was true as AAC doesn't include DRM, but practically it does as AAC should be placed in MPEG4-containers (this assumes that we talk about MPEG4-AACs and not MPEG2-AACs), and MPEG4 supports DRM (since June 2003 IIRC).
The AAC-DRM mandates AES-128, encryption, this is the same that iTunes use. Although iTunes AACs are not compliant to the standard as they name the encrypted audio atom 'drms' instead of 'enca'. MPEG4 also supports 'encv' for encrypted video.
Since it is AES-128 there is no use in trying a brute force attack on the file, I mean AES have an estimated information security of up to 50 years (Moore's law included). So it is basically a task of trying to generate the right key for the file by cracking the player application, but Jon already did this for the Windows version of iTunes. All that you have to do is to read lots of uncommented assembly code and hope to make something out of the function names.
IANAL, so you have to interprete this for yourself. Actually, I find the section hard to get when including the first and second sentence. What does "maintain legitimate competition" mean? Is region protection for hindering U.S. DVDs competing against the same European DVDs legitimate, or does that fall under the first sentence? E.g. that devices must not be used to seal off markets (EES is one market so this can't mean "markets" internally, "markets" must suggest external markets and EES, right?).
Anyway, just my 0.02 EUR
From the latest IP law (parlament amendment 9):
Technical protection devices must not be used in order to seal off markets from one another. For this reason it is not unlawful for third parties to use technical protection devices when such use is necessary to maintain legitimate competition. In particular, legitimate parallel trading in the Community must not be monitored by the use of technical protection devices. This also applies to the hindering or complete exclusion of trading in spare parts by designing appliances for which such spare parts are intended in such a way that they will only accept the spare parts of the appliance's manufacturer.
"Zapatero is indeed smart in saying that the spanish troops will stay in Iraq only if the whole situation is handled by the UN."
How can you think that that is smart, he tells the terrorists that they have won. I don't see anything good with that. It would in fact be better to say, "we will stay", then at least the sacrifice of 200 innocent won't be in wain. Making voters happy is not a politician's job in a time of crisis.
What he should have done is to withdraw in silence when the new government in Iraq is in place, it would be a logical moment in time for that.
Now, we can probably go on and debate this forever and we won't get anywhere.:)
What I did say was that it was irresponsible of the new Spanish prime to announce a troop withdrawal just days after the attack. al-Qaida's goal was to shatter the coalition in Iraq and do this by striking at the weakest link. Apparently they struck right, and Spain proved to be weak.
I understand that the new prime went into election, promising to withdraw the troops and due to these promises he should withdraw the troops, but NOT UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES. There is a greater game here, far greater than 200 lives and happy voters. Terrorism should NEVER, EVER be allowed to win. Do you want to live in, or do you want your children to live in a world were terrorists can kill innocent people, and get what they want. Jose (the new prime) sent a signal to the terrorists, he said that the Spanish nation was weak, that Europe is weak, he gave the terrorists right. This is not good. Who do the terrorists strike at next, now that they tasted the sweetness of victory? Italy? Poland? Denmark? UK? Holland?
But, whoever they strikes at, and they will, I will not hold Jose responsible for the terrorism, because he is not, he just gave the terrorists more incentive by showing himself weak in a situation where you should not. The responsible for the acts are the terrorists, not anyone else. Not Bush, not Aznar, not Nixon, not Reagan, not Blair, not Jose, the responsible are the terrorists and their endorsers.
I couldn't agree more with your reply. Firstly I will make my point of view clear. I do not enjoy being dependant on the US for security, it would be a lot better if the EU could handle security and defence on it own; and I fully believe in and long for the day when a true European federation has been built.
The EU and the US are two inseparable entities. With a stronger EU; the EU and the US would complement each other pretty well, with the US preventing the EU from acting in certain ways and the EU preventing the US from acting in certain ways. This would mean that the EU NEEDS a common defence organisation, for clearly 20 different armed organisations that need to be synchronised is not very effective and deterring. The problem at the moment is that this in not doable, politically. However as more Europeans move between the different states and the European spirit spreads it will certainly be possible within a not so long time; just think on the progress in the last 50 years.
The marks on the geography was just a comment about the stupidity, there are several kinds of stupidity and I certainly know stupid Europeans. Anyway, the survey result is available at http://www.nationalgeographic.com/geosurvey/highli ghts.html
The mark on Europeans not fighting any major war recently is not quite true, many European nations did fight in the Gulf War and also in the recent invasion of Iraq, but I get your point and you are right on.
I agree with you on the part about leaving bad people alone. They won't leave you alone, so why should you not fight back. Yielding to them (as the next prime minister of Spain did) is just plain stupid, since this just tells the "bad people" that it is ok to bully you around; this is NOT acceptable.
Yeah, thanks for bailing us out during WWII. I would like to add though; we both know what the US would be without Europe... oh, it wouldn't exist.
And if you claim that Europeans slaughter each other, I might claim the same about Americans. I mean, look at Colombia and Chile.
Now, if you are talking stupid I might add that the average U.S. individual scored lower than the average European in National Geographics survey on world-knowledge last year. To many Americans (from now on an American is a person from the US) couldn't identify Afganistan on a map despite that the U.S. was in war in this country.
While I could go on and rant about European supremacy, I won't; and I suggest that you don't rant about American supremacy either.
Re:STOP ALL EXPLORATION NOW
on
Melting Europa
·
· Score: 1
Considering the average american's knowledge of the world outside U.S. borders, no one ever went to those classes.
Usually compilers can detect this and treat recursive calls as loops instead of as function calls. I know that some C-compilers do this. In-fact, it is imperative in functional programming to be familiar with tail recursion and lazy evaluation.
If you don't know about these terms, then don't make any comments about the efficiency of functional languages.
By the way, treat languages as tools. I know Haskell, Erlang, C/C++/Objective-C, Java, PHP, Pascal, Python, MPD, AppleScript and 5 variants of assembler. What do I do with all these languages? Well I pick one that is suitable for the task at hand. And if none of them fits my needs, I pick a language that suits my needs and learn it.
Oh well, I'm ranting... but you probably get my point.
Funny thing about spam-filters. I know a doctor and she complained about how all the e-mail about Viagra (sent from colleagues) got lost, she did however get lot's of spam containing the spelling V!@G.RA (or there about).
She and her colleagues now use codewords to describe the drug in e-mail.
Claiming C is dead is plainly stupid. Languages are tools, not religions or whatever. Languages have their weaknesses and their strengths.
Fortran is extremely good for producing high performance number crunching code (it forbids array overlapping, and thus several assumptions can be made by the compiler). C is very low level and I would hardly chose another language when writing an operating system, it is also a fairly general purpose language, good for many things. If I am writing a GUI-app I would surely pick an object oriented language such as C++, Java or Objective-C. If I write a 3d engine, I'd like performance and an object oriented approach and I would chose either C (combined with self discipline) or C++.
The portability of Java and other byte code languages is surely appealing, but they usually produce a terrible user experience since the applications produced tend to have a user interface compliant with the developer's OS (mixed with the language's own HI guidelines). A Java app written by a Windows developer would probably look like a Windows app, even on a Mac, and the other way around. Consistency in user interface is very important I think, so my hope is that people write code according to the MVC principle, and thus ease porting of the application to other platforms. Just to note, I'm not condemning Java, it is a very useful language if you want an internal application that is to be deployed on different systems. Say that the graphics departement (using Macs) and the economics departement (using Windows) both need access to some internal database or application, then clearly Java is the way to go.
Anyway, select your language after the task at hand and write code with discipline!
"Your first session will include learning the difference in 'left click' and 'right click' "
So, that means that Apple did it right then.
I remember my first Mac (a Mac PLUS), I got it when I was 8 or something there around. It came with a diskette containing training software, teaching you to click, double click, point and drag using a cool animated (I was 8) game in wich you would point at numbers (in order), click on doves to make them fly away, and double click on windows to see who was behind them. After this cool point and click game you got into training to use the desktop (I don't know what exercises were available as I always quit when I got this far).
The point being, why don't Apple (or MS) include such software with the computer anymore?
Ok, I'm not a top 1000 company, but who knows what I might buy after I win the counter lawsuit for illegal suing. I was thinking on buying SCO with their money, then I would own all their IP and I would "take on the world" (tm).
Oh, I know that it doesn't make sense, but you will understand later.
What kinds of attacks have they been checking? OSes doesn't mean shit when the lazy coders have written the login-app for the admin page like this (pseudo code):
function login(string user, string pass) returns bool { # fix later, let us log in during development
return true; }
I have seen admin-pages for web shops looking like this. I have also seen user verification done in Java script on the client!
They already do. But they go to the US. One of the Commissions greatest concerns at the moment is the brain-drain of Europe. Prominent Scientists and Engineers go to the US as they get a) higher salary, b) larger funding for research.
One solution would be to actually give the Scientists and Engineers in Europe higher salaries and larger funding... but that would be a to easy solution.
However, my point being that most Engineers give crap about what laws are in effect to threaten their freedom, they just follow the guy with the largest wallet.
Slashdot Mirror
But that has already been discussed.
What I'd like to add is that you can hardly consider something non-negotiable a contract. A contract is there as a mutual agreement between two parts and whether or not it is written or oral a contract of any worth is negotiable before signing / agreeing.
Just my 0.02€
Dont worry, just write it on a post-it note and stick the note on the monitor.
The heirs to the man who coined the mathematical term "thousand" are suing the publishers of a book named "One Thousand and a Night".
The spokesman representing the heirs said in a press conference: "The publishers of this book, sure brought lots of attention to the word that was invented some time ago, but the publishers have failed to give credits to the true inventor of the word. We have no other option than to sue!"
Actually, in Sweden you get fined 1,000 SEK (around 110€) if you leave your keys in the car.
"The reason why so few people publish their work is because most people understand that online digital music sale NEEDS DRM to survive as a business model."
Since no one have proven this, it is not possible to draw these conclusions.
I know several people who would gladly buy music online if it were DRM-free. So while some may share what they bought on the Internet or to friends, there will be additional sales as well. The most interesting thing about iTMS is the availability and that alone will sell lots of music.
I personally will not buy into a technology that binds me to a platform (I have used Macs all my life (almost), but I refuse to be locked to the platform) and I certainly will not buy into a technology such as this if Apple doesn't guarantee that if they shutdown the iTMS they will release a tool to free the songs that I have bought.
From what I heard this is not illegal in the U.S., but I'm a European so I am not really updated on such laws in the U.S.
What I do know however is that WTO rules clearly states that artificial trade barriers shall be illegal.
Who doesn't consider region codes to be an artificial trade barrier? To bad that individuals can't make pleas to the WTO.
About the routers. I 'd reckon that it would be horrible if an ISP used this, but they won't. The functionality will be used buy larger organisations that register MAC-adresses for any computer that is supposed to be allowed access to the Internet anyway. It really isn't that bad. However, it is bad if you consider the vendor lock-in of anti virus sw, but I would suppose that it is user configurable.
TCPA is not evil in itself, it is just a chip in which you can store private encryption keys. It is some of the potential uses of this technology that is evil. TCPA is however useless since all it does is to hide encryption keys, and I can do that by "chown root keys; chmod 400 keys", in a properly configured system.
Actually, there is a standard for MPEG4-DRM, this mandates that the aac-atom is named enca and is encrypted with AES-128. Apple however named the atom drms, although I do believe that is the only difference as iTunes use the same encryption algorithm.
Technically your comment was true as AAC doesn't include DRM, but practically it does as AAC should be placed in MPEG4-containers (this assumes that we talk about MPEG4-AACs and not MPEG2-AACs), and MPEG4 supports DRM (since June 2003 IIRC).
The AAC-DRM mandates AES-128, encryption, this is the same that iTunes use. Although iTunes AACs are not compliant to the standard as they name the encrypted audio atom 'drms' instead of 'enca'. MPEG4 also supports 'encv' for encrypted video.
Since it is AES-128 there is no use in trying a brute force attack on the file, I mean AES have an estimated information security of up to 50 years (Moore's law included). So it is basically a task of trying to generate the right key for the file by cracking the player application, but Jon already did this for the Windows version of iTunes. All that you have to do is to read lots of uncommented assembly code and hope to make something out of the function names.
IANAL, so you have to interprete this for yourself. Actually, I find the section hard to get when including the first and second sentence. What does "maintain legitimate competition" mean? Is region protection for hindering U.S. DVDs competing against the same European DVDs legitimate, or does that fall under the first sentence? E.g. that devices must not be used to seal off markets (EES is one market so this can't mean "markets" internally, "markets" must suggest external markets and EES, right?).
Anyway, just my 0.02 EUR
From the latest IP law (parlament amendment 9):
Technical protection devices must not be used in order to seal off markets from one another. For this reason it is not unlawful for third parties to use technical protection devices when such use is necessary to maintain legitimate competition. In particular, legitimate parallel trading in the Community must not be monitored by the use of technical protection devices. This also applies to the hindering or complete exclusion of trading in spare parts by designing appliances for which such spare parts are intended in such a way that they will only accept the spare parts of the appliance's manufacturer.
"Zapatero is indeed smart in saying that the spanish troops will stay in Iraq only if the whole situation is handled by the UN."
:)
How can you think that that is smart, he tells the terrorists that they have won. I don't see anything good with that. It would in fact be better to say, "we will stay", then at least the sacrifice of 200 innocent won't be in wain. Making voters happy is not a politician's job in a time of crisis.
What he should have done is to withdraw in silence when the new government in Iraq is in place, it would be a logical moment in time for that.
Now, we can probably go on and debate this forever and we won't get anywhere.
Sorry, but I didn't talk about that.
What I did say was that it was irresponsible of the new Spanish prime to announce a troop withdrawal just days after the attack. al-Qaida's goal was to shatter the coalition in Iraq and do this by striking at the weakest link. Apparently they struck right, and Spain proved to be weak.
I understand that the new prime went into election, promising to withdraw the troops and due to these promises he should withdraw the troops, but NOT UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES. There is a greater game here, far greater than 200 lives and happy voters. Terrorism should NEVER, EVER be allowed to win. Do you want to live in, or do you want your children to live in a world were terrorists can kill innocent people, and get what they want. Jose (the new prime) sent a signal to the terrorists, he said that the Spanish nation was weak, that Europe is weak, he gave the terrorists right. This is not good. Who do the terrorists strike at next, now that they tasted the sweetness of victory? Italy? Poland? Denmark? UK? Holland?
But, whoever they strikes at, and they will, I will not hold Jose responsible for the terrorism, because he is not, he just gave the terrorists more incentive by showing himself weak in a situation where you should not. The responsible for the acts are the terrorists, not anyone else. Not Bush, not Aznar, not Nixon, not Reagan, not Blair, not Jose, the responsible are the terrorists and their endorsers.
I couldn't agree more with your reply. Firstly I will make my point of view clear. I do not enjoy being dependant on the US for security, it would be a lot better if the EU could handle security and defence on it own; and I fully believe in and long for the day when a true European federation has been built.
i ghts.html
The EU and the US are two inseparable entities. With a stronger EU; the EU and the US would complement each other pretty well, with the US preventing the EU from acting in certain ways and the EU preventing the US from acting in certain ways. This would mean that the EU NEEDS a common defence organisation, for clearly 20 different armed organisations that need to be synchronised is not very effective and deterring. The problem at the moment is that this in not doable, politically. However as more Europeans move between the different states and the European spirit spreads it will certainly be possible within a not so long time; just think on the progress in the last 50 years.
The marks on the geography was just a comment about the stupidity, there are several kinds of stupidity and I certainly know stupid Europeans. Anyway, the survey result is available at http://www.nationalgeographic.com/geosurvey/highl
The mark on Europeans not fighting any major war recently is not quite true, many European nations did fight in the Gulf War and also in the recent invasion of Iraq, but I get your point and you are right on.
I agree with you on the part about leaving bad people alone. They won't leave you alone, so why should you not fight back. Yielding to them (as the next prime minister of Spain did) is just plain stupid, since this just tells the "bad people" that it is ok to bully you around; this is NOT acceptable.
I've decided to feed the troll.
Yeah, thanks for bailing us out during WWII. I would like to add though; we both know what the US would be without Europe... oh, it wouldn't exist.
And if you claim that Europeans slaughter each other, I might claim the same about Americans. I mean, look at Colombia and Chile.
Now, if you are talking stupid I might add that the average U.S. individual scored lower than the average European in National Geographics survey on world-knowledge last year. To many Americans (from now on an American is a person from the US) couldn't identify Afganistan on a map despite that the U.S. was in war in this country.
While I could go on and rant about European supremacy, I won't; and I suggest that you don't rant about American supremacy either.
Considering the average american's knowledge of the world outside U.S. borders, no one ever went to those classes.
Usually compilers can detect this and treat recursive calls as loops instead of as function calls. I know that some C-compilers do this. In-fact, it is imperative in functional programming to be familiar with tail recursion and lazy evaluation.
If you don't know about these terms, then don't make any comments about the efficiency of functional languages.
By the way, treat languages as tools. I know Haskell, Erlang, C/C++/Objective-C, Java, PHP, Pascal, Python, MPD, AppleScript and 5 variants of assembler. What do I do with all these languages? Well I pick one that is suitable for the task at hand. And if none of them fits my needs, I pick a language that suits my needs and learn it.
Oh well, I'm ranting... but you probably get my point.
Funny thing about spam-filters. I know a doctor and she complained about how all the e-mail about Viagra (sent from colleagues) got lost, she did however get lot's of spam containing the spelling V!@G.RA (or there about).
She and her colleagues now use codewords to describe the drug in e-mail.
Claiming C is dead is plainly stupid. Languages are tools, not religions or whatever. Languages have their weaknesses and their strengths.
Fortran is extremely good for producing high performance number crunching code (it forbids array overlapping, and thus several assumptions can be made by the compiler). C is very low level and I would hardly chose another language when writing an operating system, it is also a fairly general purpose language, good for many things. If I am writing a GUI-app I would surely pick an object oriented language such as C++, Java or Objective-C. If I write a 3d engine, I'd like performance and an object oriented approach and I would chose either C (combined with self discipline) or C++.
The portability of Java and other byte code languages is surely appealing, but they usually produce a terrible user experience since the applications produced tend to have a user interface compliant with the developer's OS (mixed with the language's own HI guidelines). A Java app written by a Windows developer would probably look like a Windows app, even on a Mac, and the other way around. Consistency in user interface is very important I think, so my hope is that people write code according to the MVC principle, and thus ease porting of the application to other platforms. Just to note, I'm not condemning Java, it is a very useful language if you want an internal application that is to be deployed on different systems. Say that the graphics departement (using Macs) and the economics departement (using Windows) both need access to some internal database or application, then clearly Java is the way to go.
Anyway, select your language after the task at hand and write code with discipline!
"Your first session will include learning the difference in 'left click' and 'right click' "
So, that means that Apple did it right then.
I remember my first Mac (a Mac PLUS), I got it when I was 8 or something there around. It came with a diskette containing training software, teaching you to click, double click, point and drag using a cool animated (I was 8) game in wich you would point at numbers (in order), click on doves to make them fly away, and double click on windows to see who was behind them. After this cool point and click game you got into training to use the desktop (I don't know what exercises were available as I always quit when I got this far).
The point being, why don't Apple (or MS) include such software with the computer anymore?
What is wrong with TeX???
Pick me!!! ;)
Ok, I'm not a top 1000 company, but who knows what I might buy after I win the counter lawsuit for illegal suing. I was thinking on buying SCO with their money, then I would own all their IP and I would "take on the world" (tm).
Oh, I know that it doesn't make sense, but you will understand later.
What kinds of attacks have they been checking? OSes doesn't mean shit when the lazy coders have written the login-app for the admin page like this (pseudo code):
function login(string user, string pass) returns bool {
# fix later, let us log in during development
return true;
}
I have seen admin-pages for web shops looking like this. I have also seen user verification done in Java script on the client!
They already do. But they go to the US. One of the Commissions greatest concerns at the moment is the brain-drain of Europe. Prominent Scientists and Engineers go to the US as they get a) higher salary, b) larger funding for research.
One solution would be to actually give the Scientists and Engineers in Europe higher salaries and larger funding... but that would be a to easy solution.
However, my point being that most Engineers give crap about what laws are in effect to threaten their freedom, they just follow the guy with the largest wallet.
And equally annoying!
Actually, iSync use the Palm HotSync Manager for syncing.