not to mention just by using the software you violate the DMCA because you step around the encryption that is there, so even if you already own the DVD, copying it using this is illegal because it's in violation of the DMCA
I can't make a copy of a DVD I bought, so if the DVD gets screwed up, what do I do? Buy a new one? That's what's wrong with the DMCA. The MPAA can't have it both ways. Or you allow me to make backup copies of the stuff I bought, or you provide me with a new one if the one I bought gets screwed up.
He's serious, of course. He also goes to his bank datacenter and connects his laptop straight to the database every time he wants to check his checking account. The guys at the bank get a bit pissy, though...
I'm running my own mail server and I have RoadRunner. I just sent an email to a friend on AOL and she just replied. So I don't think AOL is blocking all Comcast/RR dynamics. Or maybe they just like me.
Intel's Anti-Overclocking Technology Explanined Posted: 2003-04-10 by nigel By: Nathan
Introduction
Many of you may have read the recent article in the inquirer that reports on a patent that was granted to Intel for an overclocking detection and prevention device. With all due respect to our fellow journalists (they did post the story first), this article was a little lacking on the clear technical interpretation that we know our readers crave. As an alternative, you could fight your way through "United States Patent 6,535,988 - March 18, 2003", but to save you the trouble we here at Fastsilicon.com have done it for you. Herein we present a layman's guide to the patent that has got some of the overclocking community up in arms, and tell you why it's all bad. To begin our explanation, it is appropriate to explain how the system clock relates to the processor, and what "overclocking" is all about.
Clocking, Over- and Otherwise:
The way processors work in conjunction with their clock is fairly simple. Connected to the microprocessor's core is a device that produces an electrical pulse a certain number of times per second. This pulse is a sort-of "heartbeat", and with each pulse the processor does some work. The faster the pulses come, the more work the processor does. The rate at which the pulses come is expressed in units of Hertz (abbreviated as "Hz"), which stands for "times per second". If our pulse is coming 1 time per second, then we say that it has a frequency of "1 Hz", and hence the processor speed is 1 Hz. Obviously nobody runs processors at this speed; we are more accustomed to processor speeds that are measured in Megahertz (MHz) or Gigahertz (GHz), where 1 MHz is 1 million times per second and 1 GHz is 1 billion times per second. Additionally, some processors internally multiply this pulse, so in effect the processor sees (for example) 10 pulses for every external clock pulse. For the sake of simplifying things though, we'll ignore this multiplyer and proceed with the assumption that things are happening at a 1:1 ratio.
Many may ask at this point, "If the processor does more work with higher clock speeds, why are there limitations on the clock speed - why can't one run a processor as fast as they want?". Although there are many factors that contribute to the answer to this question, the basic answer to this is heat. With every clock pulse, electricity flows through the processor. Because of resistance in the processor's pathways (think of it as a sort of electrical friction), some of this energy is converted to heat, similar to what happens when you rub your hands together very quickly. The higher the clock speed, the more often the clock pulses come, which means that more heat is generated at higher clock speeds. Because processors don't react well to the effects of this heat, testing is done to determine the maximum clock speed that they can run at safely. The processors are then labeled with this clock speed, and they go out the door with a designation such as, "Pentium 4 - 2.4GHz". In this particular case, Intel has tested the processor and has determined that to run properly, it needs a clock that runs no faster than 2.4 billion times per second.
Running a processor at a higher clock speed than labeled by increasing the rate at which clock pulses happen is known as "overclocking". Because there is some "statistical leeway" in the tests that are done to determine the maximum clock speed, many times one can overclock a processor and achieve more performance without a perceived negative effect. As most hobbyists know, these negative effects come somewhat gradually as you slide up the clock speed curve. At one clock speed things may be good, but as one increases it they see more system glitches until the computer simply will no longer boot. This is where the "perceived" part of the negative effect comes in. One may not outwardly notice errors as they use a moderately overclocked system, but they still may be occuring, and the life of the processor may be de
Slashdot Mirror
Dude, if I had mod points, I'd give all of them to you. That was +25 FUNNY.
Maybe those more professed conservatives own or have interests in companies making voting machines...?
Check this out0 4
http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?t=714
I guess that gives him the right to run it...
Bah, no HT on Linux systems...
You are surrendering to a french??? What are you, canadian?
He's serious, of course. He also goes to his bank datacenter and connects his laptop straight to the database every time he wants to check his checking account. The guys at the bank get a bit pissy, though...
Maybe I should stop using 'HTML formatted' text and forgetting the tags at the same time... my post will look much nicer.
Or maybe I should use the preview button. Nahhhhhhhh...
Your forgot: Refrigerator IP address: $15.95 Groceries over IP Subscription: $5.95
I think you are 'not quite accurate'...
I'll sell you an Indy with IRIX for $289 :)
I'm running my own mail server and I have RoadRunner. I just sent an email to a friend on AOL and she just replied. So I don't think AOL is blocking all Comcast/RR dynamics. Or maybe they just like me.
Technically, only the first two pages are redundant. I posted the third page before Erect Horsecock.
:)
Re:Article 3 (Score:1) by Erect Horsecock (655858) Alter Relationship on Friday April 11, @03:36PM (#5712702)
Before the slashdotting (Score:-1, Redundant) by Amer (660212) on Friday April 11, @03:33PM (#5712679)
I just wanted to be a prick and point that out
Man... you beat by 2 minutes. It was already crawling when I was trying to access it. Now I just have to wait to get my post modded down as redundant.
Intel's Anti-Overclocking Technology Explanined
Posted: 2003-04-10 by nigel
By: Nathan
Introduction
Many of you may have read the recent article in the inquirer that reports on a patent that was granted to Intel for an overclocking detection and prevention device. With all due respect to our fellow journalists (they did post the story first), this article was a little lacking on the clear technical interpretation that we know our readers crave. As an alternative, you could fight your way through "United States Patent 6,535,988 - March 18, 2003", but to save you the trouble we here at Fastsilicon.com have done it for you. Herein we present a layman's guide to the patent that has got some of the overclocking community up in arms, and tell you why it's all bad. To begin our explanation, it is appropriate to explain how the system clock relates to the processor, and what "overclocking" is all about.
Clocking, Over- and Otherwise:
The way processors work in conjunction with their clock is fairly simple. Connected to the microprocessor's core is a device that produces an electrical pulse a certain number of times per second. This pulse is a sort-of "heartbeat", and with each pulse the processor does some work. The faster the pulses come, the more work the processor does. The rate at which the pulses come is expressed in units of Hertz (abbreviated as "Hz"), which stands for "times per second". If our pulse is coming 1 time per second, then we say that it has a frequency of "1 Hz", and hence the processor speed is 1 Hz. Obviously nobody runs processors at this speed; we are more accustomed to processor speeds that are measured in Megahertz (MHz) or Gigahertz (GHz), where 1 MHz is 1 million times per second and 1 GHz is 1 billion times per second. Additionally, some processors internally multiply this pulse, so in effect the processor sees (for example) 10 pulses for every external clock pulse. For the sake of simplifying things though, we'll ignore this multiplyer and proceed with the assumption that things are happening at a 1:1 ratio.
Many may ask at this point, "If the processor does more work with higher clock speeds, why are there limitations on the clock speed - why can't one run a processor as fast as they want?". Although there are many factors that contribute to the answer to this question, the basic answer to this is heat. With every clock pulse, electricity flows through the processor. Because of resistance in the processor's pathways (think of it as a sort of electrical friction), some of this energy is converted to heat, similar to what happens when you rub your hands together very quickly. The higher the clock speed, the more often the clock pulses come, which means that more heat is generated at higher clock speeds. Because processors don't react well to the effects of this heat, testing is done to determine the maximum clock speed that they can run at safely. The processors are then labeled with this clock speed, and they go out the door with a designation such as, "Pentium 4 - 2.4GHz". In this particular case, Intel has tested the processor and has determined that to run properly, it needs a clock that runs no faster than 2.4 billion times per second.
Running a processor at a higher clock speed than labeled by increasing the rate at which clock pulses happen is known as "overclocking". Because there is some "statistical leeway" in the tests that are done to determine the maximum clock speed, many times one can overclock a processor and achieve more performance without a perceived negative effect. As most hobbyists know, these negative effects come somewhat gradually as you slide up the clock speed curve. At one clock speed things may be good, but as one increases it they see more system glitches until the computer simply will no longer boot. This is where the "perceived" part of the negative effect comes in. One may not outwardly notice errors as they use a moderately overclocked system, but they still may be occuring, and the life of the processor may be de
What's really funny is reading all the comments of people getting pissed off :) Way to go, Taco!
What's really funny is reading all the comments of people getting pissed off :) Way to go, Taco!
I have a NEC 15" LCD and Mandrake and Suse work fine.
What!!???? Do you mean taxes aren't voluntary?