Oh, shut the fuck up about CMYK already. It's a piece of piss to convert between RGB and CMYK -- basically no more than an extension of de Morgan's theorem, or the star-delta transform in electronics. Your fucking printer driver does it on the fly in real time every time you print anything. And your eyes can't see more than 8 bits per colour per pixel. In fact, they can't distinguish more than four pixels per millimetre.
As for the user interface, think about this: Reverse gear on a Ford is to the right and towards you. Reverse gear on a Vauxhall is to the left and away from you. And here's the thing: People get used to this and manage to move between cars without problems. You could get used to the GIMP's user interface if you could be bothered. In fact, if you understood the abstract concepts (like when the gear lever is in reverse, the car moves the other way) you probably wouldn't notice the user interface.
The electronics industry has learnt as it went along. Electronic control systems tend to be more accurate than the mechanical systems they replaced. For example, a central heating boiler with fully-sequenced electronic ignition uses about half as much gas as one with a pilot burner.
Simple solution to the GMO issues would be international laws making living organisms unpatentable, and mandating that any "intellectual property" inherent in DNA belongs non-transferrably to the organism in which it occurs. This would prevent misuse of GM technology to force farmers to buy new seed each year rather than replanting seed from one year's crop the next year, or to create pesticide-resistant crops rather than pest-resistant crops; because as long as one company somewhere was selling pest-resistant, reseedable crop seeds with no way legally to block them, neither terminating nor pesticide-requiring crop seeds could ever be economically viable.
Nuclear waste wouldn't be an issue if reactors were designed primarily to generate power for civilian purposes, rather than weapons-grade radioactive material with power generation as merely a useful by-product. A reactor designed along "civilians-first" lines would consume the fuel as completely as possible, leaving mostly lead and materials with half-lives so long they could be mistaken at first glance for stable. Remember, a long half-life means "not very radioactive". It's the stuff with a short half-life you need to steer clear of (but not for so long).
Not quite. The end doesn't so much justify the means, as all means to the same end are equally valid. The obvious corollary of which is: means of different validity serve different ends.
If somebody invented a cheap, clean, abundant, renewable energy source tomorrow, Greenpeace would be siding with the fossil fuel industry to get it buried. It's clear from the way Greenpeace behave that don't care about protecting the environment; all they care about is making people feel guilty and increasing their membership.
Groups such as Greenpeace have never given so much as a flying fuck about the environment. In fact, the absolute worst thing that could happen as far as Greenpeace &c. are concerned would be the development of a cheap, plentiful and innocuous energy source capable of replacing fossil fuels altogether. Why? Because then they would no longer have a stick to beat us with.
Apple are based in California, for crying out loud -- the state with probably the most stringent environmental legislation anywhere outside the EU.
So just because fewer people pirate with this model than with CD based sales, Radiohead is [sic] just supposed to accept the piracy?
Yes.
If they're making enough money from the people who are paying for it, then it doesn't matter about the people who aren't paying for it. As another commenter pointed out, most of those people, if the only way to get it was to pay for it, probably would choose not to have it rather than pay for it -- but given that they can have it without paying for it, it's a bit pointless speculating.
If the emulation is faithful enough, the PC won't be able to know it's not a real video card (in fact there's no good reason for it not actually to produce a display "on the side", as it were). And there are plenty of existing video cards that are well-enough documented for you to be able to build something that presented the same interface to the PC.
Unless you're suggesting a new kind of DRM that requires everyone to get brand-new video cards because some of the existing ones can be indistinguibly emulated?
What's to stop me making something with an AGP connector, that pretends it's a video card (but in reality, is just writing the picture data to some on-board memory) and sticking that into a Windows PC where software DRM is being used?
The original iPlayer was Windows-only because of the DRM component, which depends for its "security" on the user not having access to the Source Code (which would show how to decrypt the data and put it to other uses beyond what the program was designed to do). Whereas Linux depends for its operation on the user having access to the Source Code (since programs must be compiled for the specific environment in which they will be executed).
So why not move the DRM into hardware? Have a device which plugs into the PCI bus. You feed it a stream of Windows DRM-encumbered data, and it spits back decrypted data. The interfaces to the outside world can be fully documented; "place data on the low-order bits of D-bus and assert IORQ*" or "an interrupt will be generated when data is ready to read from the output buffer" sort of stuff, which would allow anyone to implement a driver for any machine architecture and OS. The only mystery then is what is going on inside the silicon.
This should work with any processor (assuming enough I/O bandwidth), take some of the load off the CPU and be much more secure since the computer's main processor is not being expected to run unaudited code.
The "teardrop" shape only exists while the droplet is suspended from the liquid mass -- it is caused by surface tension trying in vain to attract the droplet to the mass. Once the droplet has separated from the rest of the liquid, then the surface tension is acting evenly in all directions over the surface of the droplet. And that's the only force acting on it (it's in freefall, so no gravity; and we can discount air resistance, because the molten stuff has so much higher a viscosity than the air through which it's travelling).
Now, if the only force acting on the droplet is one that acts evenly in all directions, then what shape do you think it is going to assume?
That most probably will only cover steam, since water and ice are actually H12O6 (the H2O "monomers" are connected in groups of six by hydrogen bonds). This explains the sixfold spin symmetry of snowflakes.
But the EU doesn't allow retroactive enforcement of a law. If they suddenly rule that software patents are legal, that will mean that until the ruling, they were illegal. Therefore, any software patent that was granted in Europe before the ruling that software patents are legal must, according to the ruling, have been illegal. So software companies will have to apply for their patents all over again..... and their applications will be struck down for obviety or non-novelty (since there is so much prior art around).
The UK is likely to end up getting kicked out of the EU as a consequence of all this.
Surely if Red Hat prevail and the patent is struck down, they won't have to pay their own legal costs? I mean..... that's the whole point of winning, isn't it?..... the eventual loser pays both sides' costs. Otherwise, there's no real disincentive against bringing a suit which is without merit, or against needlessly prolonging a case.
I'd go one further and say that patent licencing should be compulsory -- and licencing fees should be the same for every user. In fact, maybe it should be the patent office that sets the amount of the fees.
Anyway, this particular patent will be struck down on examination -- it fails both the novelty and obviety tests (to say nothing of being invalid in most countries in the world). Red Hat should submit a motion that the case is entirely without merit and IP Innovation LLC are being vexatious litigants.
I hope [loss of business] isn't a reason to sue. I don't like patents much, but I loath the idea of a valid lawsuit based on "loss of business."
I personally think that annulment of the patent in question would be the best outcome for all concerned. It would send a powerful message to the patent trolls of the world: even the finest wine can turn to vinegar.
Wouldn't it be simpler just to overturn the patent?
Or alternatively, for the HDD manufacturers collectively to sue the Reibers on the basis that their refusal to licence their patent has cost them business.
Why do you need a high-tech solution for de-mining? All you need is a fast-breeding nuisance animal that is heavy enough to set off the mines. Release a few of them into the minefields, and wait. As the minefields get emptier, you sterilise the animals (two housebricks will do, if there's nothing better available) before you release them..... that way you don't replace one problem with another.
I read a report where some university or other tried various methods of controlling mice: different designs of lethal and non-lethal traps, poisons, non-lethal repellents &c.
The best results taking all factors into account were obtained using a cat.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, shut the fuck up about CMYK already. It's a piece of piss to convert between RGB and CMYK -- basically no more than an extension of de Morgan's theorem, or the star-delta transform in electronics. Your fucking printer driver does it on the fly in real time every time you print anything. And your eyes can't see more than 8 bits per colour per pixel. In fact, they can't distinguish more than four pixels per millimetre.
As for the user interface, think about this: Reverse gear on a Ford is to the right and towards you. Reverse gear on a Vauxhall is to the left and away from you. And here's the thing: People get used to this and manage to move between cars without problems. You could get used to the GIMP's user interface if you could be bothered. In fact, if you understood the abstract concepts (like when the gear lever is in reverse, the car moves the other way) you probably wouldn't notice the user interface.
The electronics industry has learnt as it went along. Electronic control systems tend to be more accurate than the mechanical systems they replaced. For example, a central heating boiler with fully-sequenced electronic ignition uses about half as much gas as one with a pilot burner.
Simple solution to the GMO issues would be international laws making living organisms unpatentable, and mandating that any "intellectual property" inherent in DNA belongs non-transferrably to the organism in which it occurs. This would prevent misuse of GM technology to force farmers to buy new seed each year rather than replanting seed from one year's crop the next year, or to create pesticide-resistant crops rather than pest-resistant crops; because as long as one company somewhere was selling pest-resistant, reseedable crop seeds with no way legally to block them, neither terminating nor pesticide-requiring crop seeds could ever be economically viable.
Nuclear waste wouldn't be an issue if reactors were designed primarily to generate power for civilian purposes, rather than weapons-grade radioactive material with power generation as merely a useful by-product. A reactor designed along "civilians-first" lines would consume the fuel as completely as possible, leaving mostly lead and materials with half-lives so long they could be mistaken at first glance for stable. Remember, a long half-life means "not very radioactive". It's the stuff with a short half-life you need to steer clear of (but not for so long).
Not quite. The end doesn't so much justify the means, as all means to the same end are equally valid. The obvious corollary of which is: means of different validity serve different ends.
If somebody invented a cheap, clean, abundant, renewable energy source tomorrow, Greenpeace would be siding with the fossil fuel industry to get it buried. It's clear from the way Greenpeace behave that don't care about protecting the environment; all they care about is making people feel guilty and increasing their membership.
Ah, but Bromine is in Group VIIb, one down from Chlorine. Therefore it must be evil!
Watch out Iodine, you're next!
Groups such as Greenpeace have never given so much as a flying fuck about the environment. In fact, the absolute worst thing that could happen as far as Greenpeace &c. are concerned would be the development of a cheap, plentiful and innocuous energy source capable of replacing fossil fuels altogether. Why? Because then they would no longer have a stick to beat us with.
Apple are based in California, for crying out loud -- the state with probably the most stringent environmental legislation anywhere outside the EU.
If they're making enough money from the people who are paying for it, then it doesn't matter about the people who aren't paying for it. As another commenter pointed out, most of those people, if the only way to get it was to pay for it, probably would choose not to have it rather than pay for it -- but given that they can have it without paying for it, it's a bit pointless speculating.
If they offered it as uncompressed 88.2kHz / 24 bit PCM, somebody would still complain about the bitrate being too low.
Here's a clue: 160kb/s is still way better than what one of those £15 MP3 players can reproduce faithfully through the supplied headphones.
No, 2^8 is 10. 2**8 is 256.
If the emulation is faithful enough, the PC won't be able to know it's not a real video card (in fact there's no good reason for it not actually to produce a display "on the side", as it were). And there are plenty of existing video cards that are well-enough documented for you to be able to build something that presented the same interface to the PC.
Unless you're suggesting a new kind of DRM that requires everyone to get brand-new video cards because some of the existing ones can be indistinguibly emulated?
I always refer to them as "Murder King".
What's to stop me making something with an AGP connector, that pretends it's a video card (but in reality, is just writing the picture data to some on-board memory) and sticking that into a Windows PC where software DRM is being used?
The original iPlayer was Windows-only because of the DRM component, which depends for its "security" on the user not having access to the Source Code (which would show how to decrypt the data and put it to other uses beyond what the program was designed to do). Whereas Linux depends for its operation on the user having access to the Source Code (since programs must be compiled for the specific environment in which they will be executed).
So why not move the DRM into hardware? Have a device which plugs into the PCI bus. You feed it a stream of Windows DRM-encumbered data, and it spits back decrypted data. The interfaces to the outside world can be fully documented; "place data on the low-order bits of D-bus and assert IORQ*" or "an interrupt will be generated when data is ready to read from the output buffer" sort of stuff, which would allow anyone to implement a driver for any machine architecture and OS. The only mystery then is what is going on inside the silicon.
This should work with any processor (assuming enough I/O bandwidth), take some of the load off the CPU and be much more secure since the computer's main processor is not being expected to run unaudited code.
The "teardrop" shape only exists while the droplet is suspended from the liquid mass -- it is caused by surface tension trying in vain to attract the droplet to the mass. Once the droplet has separated from the rest of the liquid, then the surface tension is acting evenly in all directions over the surface of the droplet. And that's the only force acting on it (it's in freefall, so no gravity; and we can discount air resistance, because the molten stuff has so much higher a viscosity than the air through which it's travelling).
Now, if the only force acting on the droplet is one that acts evenly in all directions, then what shape do you think it is going to assume?
That most probably will only cover steam, since water and ice are actually H12O6 (the H2O "monomers" are connected in groups of six by hydrogen bonds). This explains the sixfold spin symmetry of snowflakes.
But the EU doesn't allow retroactive enforcement of a law. If they suddenly rule that software patents are legal, that will mean that until the ruling, they were illegal. Therefore, any software patent that was granted in Europe before the ruling that software patents are legal must, according to the ruling, have been illegal. So software companies will have to apply for their patents all over again ..... and their applications will be struck down for obviety or non-novelty (since there is so much prior art around).
The UK is likely to end up getting kicked out of the EU as a consequence of all this.
Surely if Red Hat prevail and the patent is struck down, they won't have to pay their own legal costs? I mean ..... that's the whole point of winning, isn't it? ..... the eventual loser pays both sides' costs. Otherwise, there's no real disincentive against bringing a suit which is without merit, or against needlessly prolonging a case.
I'd go one further and say that patent licencing should be compulsory -- and licencing fees should be the same for every user. In fact, maybe it should be the patent office that sets the amount of the fees.
Anyway, this particular patent will be struck down on examination -- it fails both the novelty and obviety tests (to say nothing of being invalid in most countries in the world). Red Hat should submit a motion that the case is entirely without merit and IP Innovation LLC are being vexatious litigants.
Wouldn't it be simpler just to overturn the patent?
.....
Or alternatively, for the HDD manufacturers collectively to sue the Reibers on the basis that their refusal to licence their patent has cost them business.
Or, of course, to refer the Reibers to Arkell v. Pressdram
But conjunctions aren't good to begin sentences with .....
Why do you need a high-tech solution for de-mining? All you need is a fast-breeding nuisance animal that is heavy enough to set off the mines. Release a few of them into the minefields, and wait. As the minefields get emptier, you sterilise the animals (two housebricks will do, if there's nothing better available) before you release them ..... that way you don't replace one problem with another.
I read a report where some university or other tried various methods of controlling mice: different designs of lethal and non-lethal traps, poisons, non-lethal repellents &c.
The best results taking all factors into account were obtained using a cat.