Yeah, I think you're right. They're actually in 0xe0c000 on the IIgs and ghosted to 0x00c000 for use by older code. In fact, banks 0xe0 and 0xe1 are both ghosted to banks 0x00 and 0x01.
Man, I'm firing neurons that haven't seen activity in years!
Gotta love that miniassembler. Someday I plan to port SABOTAGE to IIgs graphics, with clouds, storms, and day/night effects. And more colorful detail on the graphics. I've got a full disassembly of the 8-bit version in a text file somewhere. If only I had a 65c816 crossassembler to run under Mac OS X.
My favorite shape table:
e8: 0 3
300: 1 0 4 0 4 0
That and a few lines of BASIC code, instant graphics program using cursor keys to move the pixel and space bar to toggle plot/noplot.
You're confusing the SmartPort drive connector with SCSI. The IIgs could take 5.25" and 3.5" drives out of the box without an interface card. It was not a SCSI interface.
Apple has made non-SCSI hard drives though. I have a manual for one which included such laughs as: If you consider losing even one tenth of this (20 MB) drive's capacity, you would back up often! (Not an exact quote, but exact figures.) I wouldn't be surprised if they made one that was SmartPort-compatible. Still doesn't make it a SCSI drive though.
Well, you wouldn't want to direct them to just any 256-byte chunk of the first 64K of memory. Assuming you're using IIgs-specific graphics, you still wouldn't want to point them to 0xc000 lest they start flipping softswitches and suddenly a critical block on your disk gets wiped out.
Bradley Kuhn, executive director of the Free Software Foundation, which is the copyright holder for much of the GNU Linux operating system, said if a company is not after money, suing is not the way to go.
Apparently author Peter Galli is practicing his contrapositives by paraphrasing Bradley Kuhn.
They mean via the ethernet cable connected to the access point. It is the access point getting the power.
But one can derive power from radio signals (Scientific American, 1972 I think). Unfortunately, doing so reduces the effective range of the transmitter and thus probably violates some laws/FCC rules.
In essence this is a new international electrical standardization. Since it is built on top of existing compatible ethernet standards, the US, Europe, and Asia are placed under the umbrella of one universal compatible power standard....[T]he possibilities are very exciting in my opinion.
Don't worry; I'm sure they'll come up with a way to mess it up.
After all, what good is a new power standard if it doesn't create a new adapter that the consumer is required to purchase? Gotta have more gougeables on the market.
Of course, that the middle column is not of fixed width is the only thing right about the page. It lets the text consume the space it needs. Unfortunately, the other columns bizarrely took their share first and weren't collapsed for not utilizing it (as previous Netscape versions did). Anyway, I use this:
/* Override fixed-HTML-width tables */ table[width] { width: auto ! important } td[width] { width: auto ! important } th[width] { width: auto ! important } col[width] { width: auto ! important } spacer { display: none ! important } img[height="1"] { display: none ! important }
Gets rid of all that nasty fixed-table-width-for-layout crap which is mostly unnecessary.
I use Mozilla 1.3 and it renders a little wide for my browser. But then I have a userContent.css client-side stylesheet that overrides table and cell widths, allowing the cells to expand and contract according to the needs of the content.
The problem is in the markup. The table is defined to be 720 pixels wide. The first row is 670 and spans all three columns. The second row defines the first column to be 720 pixels wide, the middle undefined, and the third to be 720 pixels wide. Third row is structured the same as the first.
So the content ends up squished between two columns of 720 pixels width in a table which becomes at least 1440 pixels wide.
But I'd normally assume that the engine would compress them for not utilizing at least that much space with flowing content. Do you happen to have TABLE { table-format: fixed; } in your userContent.css to speed up the rendering of websites? If so, you have far too much confidence in the competence of web page designers!
I'd definitely recommend the SIO2PC cable. Remember that blank disks are becoming an extreme rarety. Stick to interfaces that let you bring the data to modern storage (and back again).
If all else fails, and if it has one (my research suggested that some models didn't), you could capture the program listing via the TV Output and use a PC program to OCR it. If you capture to VHS, use SP mode on a new tape (highest quality, uses more tape), and if possible make the listing display slow enough that you'll be able to keep up with it on playback if you have to recode by hand from the video. Not the best option, but useful as insurance against disaster in case power gets lost before the cable arrives. Even some Polaroids of screenfuls of the listing could help.
A little imagination and you can create the next Tetris.
My little imagination has children doing cartwheels in front of the camera to rotate the Tetris pieces. Clear the room of hard furniture!
Even better if the kids have to be contortionists and make themselves into the shapes of the pieces before they could move them. Substitute the on-screen images of the pieces with the still-store images of the contortioned player. Then enjoy the on-screen self-dismemberment as lines get completed.
But it is not appropriate that since this is being distributed commercially, it reaffirms that these particular games are again viable commercial products and should be respected as such?
I'm not saying that their emulation needs to be ripped out of MAME, but it would seem appropriate to discontinue distributing these ROMs. As long as the copyright holder is distributing them, it is improper for others to do so.
I can think of no reasonable justification for continuing to infringe on the copyrights of these particular games (for a suitably low threshold definition of "reasonable", considering it was indeed illegal anyway).
I think its this "lifetime of the original work" part that is the problem. It is not "easily understood" since you had to explain what you attempted to convey
Only to those who ignore the word "beyond". Not only should copyright not outlive the work, it should expire before that work expires, because if all copies expire before they have a chance to enter the public domain, they've essentially gained copyright in perpetuity.
Since we are still specifically talking about ROMs, they have clearly not degraded to "unusability" since people want to and do play them.
Except that those ROMs have only survived due to the efforts of others to violate copyright and make more durable copies. Newer games now not only would require violation of copyright to preserve them, but also the DMCA.
If copyright had not been violated by the making of these more durable copies, these works may well have ceased to function entirely and been lost not only to people now but also to the public domain later, unless the copyright holder deigned to republish and assuming he still possesses viable copies himself to republish.
What constitutes effective republishing of works would be a matter left for a court to decide, preferably by the finding of a jury. A fair market at a fair price.
No outside entity is entitled to dictate what a copyright holder does with their work until the copyright has expired.
The law should if it ever intends that copyright be only for limited times as required to be constitutional. If a copyright holder is allowed to enjoy his copyright and still destroy his work before the copyright expires, that person has violated the limited times clause. To avoid forfeiture of all profits derived from the copyrighting of that work, the copyright holder must relinquish the work to the public domain and allow reasonable time for copies to be made before the destruction of any work.
This would apply also to destruction by entropy, especially designed-in entropy such as DVDs that degrade after 48 hours of exposure to air.
We must remember that copyright law applies to individuals as well as corporations that it is trendy to perceive as evil. Current law protects these individuals, sometimes you perceive it to hurt you.
Individuals or corporations, they both have a duty to the public as a whole and to honor the contract that granted them exclusive rights for limited times that such times be limited.
And the law as it stands already provides for the restoration of copyright to a restored work.
As to the last paragraph, you are right, it must not, and does not. Anyone who has fairly purchased the work can make appropriate copies under fair use laws. Here the work will be preserved (in abundance in the case of software) until it enters the public domain.
You forget the DMCA which prevents such preservation by preventing the making of appropriate copies under the fair use defense by making illegal the making available the tools to do so. The only out you have is to make the tools to do so yourself unaided, while those creating the protection schemes have thousands working for them to create them.
And even if one person alone was able to develop the tool (and knowledge behind the tool) to successfully transfer an encrypted game into a durable form, he still cannot share the copy he made with others. He cannot legally distribute it for the purposes of preservation.
Without the (illegal) dissemination, these works are still in danger of expiring before their copyright as those that possess them expire in the traditional sense and even the copies are forgotten.
Effective preservation requires dissemination, because humans themselves (and their intent) aren't sufficiently durable to outlast copyright. And since the law reserves dissemination to the copyright holder, damn straight the law should demand the copyright holder either dissemin
No, copyright on a stone statue would still be for a limited, reasonable amount of time. I don't propose extending copyright for durable items; rather that copyright on materials published in fragile media and intended to be useful for extremely short periods (esp. in context of current copyright duration) should have similarly limited copyright durations.
The copyright I enjoy on a sand castle created on the beach should be less than the time it takes for the tide to wipe it out forever. There's no reason for works that degrade to unusability to enjoy protection of creator's lifetime plus 50 years. (Granted, I'd have a hard time proving infringement of another's sand castle on my washed-out work.)
I'd entertain the possibility that works transferred to a more durable media by the publisher within the limited copyright term of its original media (or other continued publishing of the work) could extend the copyright, but only to the extent that it could have enjoyed from its original publication had it been published on sufficiently durable media.
Such as if I make a durable mold of my sand castle. Even current law would allow me to reclaim my copyright after a period of it lapsing into the public domain by casting a new one from that mold. Similarly, if a game's copyright owner doesn't like his ROMs being distributed freely, he can simply republish his ROMs himself and enjoin others from publishing under his restored copyright.
I'd also amend it to require meaningful publication and not just a periodic private sale of a single copy of a program on an obsolete 8" floppy.
I'd be interested in hearing of these better ways to determine reasonable copyright duration, but the lifetime of the original work is an easily understood metric and emphasizes the need for works to lose protection before they are lost to all forever.
It cannot fall upon the copyright owner to preserve his works for their future entry into the public domain when there is no legal mandate for him to do so. Especially while there are laws preventing anyone else from preserving the same works by copying.
It was supposed to be for apps that emulate or interface with real-world devices.
And was one of the justifications Apple had for killing the iCommune plug-in for iTunes: the license to create plug-ins was only for creating interfaces to peripherals, and the Internet didn't qualify.
Then came Safari, which sported the brushed metal interface. Suddenly, Apple feels the Web is a peripheral device?
Apple, don't expect developers to play by the rules when you fail to do so yourself.
In my opinion, it is simply wrong for copyright to continue to be enforced beyond the lifetime of the original work. Why should a 20 year old game cartridge be illegal to copy even when it has ceased to function? Why should a paper placemat at a fast food restaurant enjoy artist's lifetime+50 years when it will cease to exist in less than a month?
Allowing copyright to persist beyond the lifetime of the work itself creates an eternal copyright, especially when the copyright holder takes little to no steps to preserve the work for when^W if it enters the public domain.
And if the only surviving copies are in the hands of the original copyright holder, if the work ever does enter the public domain, that person (or corporate entity) has no incentive to ever publish it again.
All works are not created equal; copyright should not treat them all as equal.
I can see all sorts of messages one can put on their body with reflective paint for all those scanner operators to see.
I don't think the operators of these scanners are going to be a significantly large advertising venue to make backscatter x-ray body paint advertisement viable.
Unless of course the advertiser is GoldenPalace.com. They'll advertise anywhere and take advantage of the bad publicity. Because they don't just want to be famous; they want to be infamous!
What about the person running the machine? That poor screener's going to get more repeated doses than passengers.
But then if he's looking at all the young kids and infants naked via this machine, perhaps he should get dosed, if these totally hairless bleached-out views do indeed become titillating to the operator.
If the contraindicated items show up black and skin shows up white, you'd think they'd realize that a simple modification of inverting the image and a high-pass filter after that would give the screener a visual of the contraband items while preserving the modesty of the citizen.
Yeah, and those particular images of Bugs Bunny are now in the public domain, but if you try to make your own brand-new Bugs Bunny cartoon, you're still going to fall afoul of the Warners lawyers, because Bugs is still a trademark of Warners.
But with computers nowadays, you could isolate every frame of those public domain works, mix and match backgrounds and foregrounds, redo the mouth animation and provide new dialogue. Bingo: new cartoon using existing public domain material.
Unless Warner Bros. can sue for infringement over the voice talent being able to mimic the voice. If that were actionable, then impressionism would become an illegal talent. (You could remix the voices to put the syllables in the right places, but that's a lot of extra expense.)
"They are still actively enforced, and the Supreme Court has consistently held in modern times that a search warrant is not needed to break into your house if it is suspected that you are in the act of sex without the possibility of pregnancy."
Still, that's a very bad failure condition, and a bad first impression. Hopefully the MMOG isn't coded by their web developers.
BTW, it is only a redirection loop if you keep Javascript enabled. Turn off Javascript and it stops, then redirects you to a 404'd noflash page, which only link takes you back through another Javascripted flash check. Only if you enable Javascript and allow cookies can you get to the real no-Flash pages.
Slashdot Mirror
marinetti also supports the LanceGS, a 10Base-T ethernet card for the IIgs. Don't laugh, it really works!
The UMF is strong with this one.
Yeah, I think you're right. They're actually in 0xe0c000 on the IIgs and ghosted to 0x00c000 for use by older code. In fact, banks 0xe0 and 0xe1 are both ghosted to banks 0x00 and 0x01.
Man, I'm firing neurons that haven't seen activity in years!
Slightly more modern entry, less obfuscated, to see if I'm remembering it right:
Gotta love that miniassembler. Someday I plan to port SABOTAGE to IIgs graphics, with clouds, storms, and day/night effects. And more colorful detail on the graphics. I've got a full disassembly of the 8-bit version in a text file somewhere. If only I had a 65c816 crossassembler to run under Mac OS X.
My favorite shape table:
That and a few lines of BASIC code, instant graphics program using cursor keys to move the pixel and space bar to toggle plot/noplot.
You're confusing the SmartPort drive connector with SCSI. The IIgs could take 5.25" and 3.5" drives out of the box without an interface card. It was not a SCSI interface.
Apple has made non-SCSI hard drives though. I have a manual for one which included such laughs as: If you consider losing even one tenth of this (20 MB) drive's capacity, you would back up often! (Not an exact quote, but exact figures.) I wouldn't be surprised if they made one that was SmartPort-compatible. Still doesn't make it a SCSI drive though.
Well, you wouldn't want to direct them to just any 256-byte chunk of the first 64K of memory. Assuming you're using IIgs-specific graphics, you still wouldn't want to point them to 0xc000 lest they start flipping softswitches and suddenly a critical block on your disk gets wiped out.
Now all we need is a networked multi-player version of Oregon Trail, and I'm happy for the next year!
Why stop there? Wolf 3D was ported to the IIgs.
Apparently author Peter Galli is practicing his contrapositives by paraphrasing Bradley Kuhn.
Power without a wire? How about that?
They mean via the ethernet cable connected to the access point. It is the access point getting the power.
But one can derive power from radio signals (Scientific American, 1972 I think). Unfortunately, doing so reduces the effective range of the transmitter and thus probably violates some laws/FCC rules.
In essence this is a new international electrical standardization. Since it is built on top of existing compatible ethernet standards, the US, Europe, and Asia are placed under the umbrella of one universal compatible power standard. ...[T]he possibilities are very exciting in my opinion.
Don't worry; I'm sure they'll come up with a way to mess it up.
After all, what good is a new power standard if it doesn't create a new adapter that the consumer is required to purchase? Gotta have more gougeables on the market.
Gets rid of all that nasty fixed-table-width-for-layout crap which is mostly unnecessary.
I use Mozilla 1.3 and it renders a little wide for my browser. But then I have a userContent.css client-side stylesheet that overrides table and cell widths, allowing the cells to expand and contract according to the needs of the content.
The problem is in the markup. The table is defined to be 720 pixels wide. The first row is 670 and spans all three columns. The second row defines the first column to be 720 pixels wide, the middle undefined, and the third to be 720 pixels wide. Third row is structured the same as the first.
So the content ends up squished between two columns of 720 pixels width in a table which becomes at least 1440 pixels wide.
But I'd normally assume that the engine would compress them for not utilizing at least that much space with flowing content. Do you happen to have TABLE { table-format: fixed; } in your userContent.css to speed up the rendering of websites? If so, you have far too much confidence in the competence of web page designers!
I'd definitely recommend the SIO2PC cable. Remember that blank disks are becoming an extreme rarety. Stick to interfaces that let you bring the data to modern storage (and back again).
If all else fails, and if it has one (my research suggested that some models didn't), you could capture the program listing via the TV Output and use a PC program to OCR it. If you capture to VHS, use SP mode on a new tape (highest quality, uses more tape), and if possible make the listing display slow enough that you'll be able to keep up with it on playback if you have to recode by hand from the video. Not the best option, but useful as insurance against disaster in case power gets lost before the cable arrives. Even some Polaroids of screenfuls of the listing could help.
The idea is that a copy is better than no copy.
A little imagination and you can create the next Tetris.
My little imagination has children doing cartwheels in front of the camera to rotate the Tetris pieces. Clear the room of hard furniture!
Even better if the kids have to be contortionists and make themselves into the shapes of the pieces before they could move them. Substitute the on-screen images of the pieces with the still-store images of the contortioned player. Then enjoy the on-screen self-dismemberment as lines get completed.
But it is not appropriate that since this is being distributed commercially, it reaffirms that these particular games are again viable commercial products and should be respected as such?
I'm not saying that their emulation needs to be ripped out of MAME, but it would seem appropriate to discontinue distributing these ROMs. As long as the copyright holder is distributing them, it is improper for others to do so.
I can think of no reasonable justification for continuing to infringe on the copyrights of these particular games (for a suitably low threshold definition of "reasonable", considering it was indeed illegal anyway).
I think its this "lifetime of the original work" part that is the problem. It is not "easily understood" since you had to explain what you attempted to convey
Only to those who ignore the word "beyond". Not only should copyright not outlive the work, it should expire before that work expires, because if all copies expire before they have a chance to enter the public domain, they've essentially gained copyright in perpetuity.
Since we are still specifically talking about ROMs, they have clearly not degraded to "unusability" since people want to and do play them.
Except that those ROMs have only survived due to the efforts of others to violate copyright and make more durable copies. Newer games now not only would require violation of copyright to preserve them, but also the DMCA.
If copyright had not been violated by the making of these more durable copies, these works may well have ceased to function entirely and been lost not only to people now but also to the public domain later, unless the copyright holder deigned to republish and assuming he still possesses viable copies himself to republish.
What constitutes effective republishing of works would be a matter left for a court to decide, preferably by the finding of a jury. A fair market at a fair price.
No outside entity is entitled to dictate what a copyright holder does with their work until the copyright has expired.
The law should if it ever intends that copyright be only for limited times as required to be constitutional. If a copyright holder is allowed to enjoy his copyright and still destroy his work before the copyright expires, that person has violated the limited times clause. To avoid forfeiture of all profits derived from the copyrighting of that work, the copyright holder must relinquish the work to the public domain and allow reasonable time for copies to be made before the destruction of any work.
This would apply also to destruction by entropy, especially designed-in entropy such as DVDs that degrade after 48 hours of exposure to air.
We must remember that copyright law applies to individuals as well as corporations that it is trendy to perceive as evil. Current law protects these individuals, sometimes you perceive it to hurt you.
Individuals or corporations, they both have a duty to the public as a whole and to honor the contract that granted them exclusive rights for limited times that such times be limited.
And the law as it stands already provides for the restoration of copyright to a restored work.
As to the last paragraph, you are right, it must not, and does not. Anyone who has fairly purchased the work can make appropriate copies under fair use laws. Here the work will be preserved (in abundance in the case of software) until it enters the public domain.
You forget the DMCA which prevents such preservation by preventing the making of appropriate copies under the fair use defense by making illegal the making available the tools to do so. The only out you have is to make the tools to do so yourself unaided, while those creating the protection schemes have thousands working for them to create them.
And even if one person alone was able to develop the tool (and knowledge behind the tool) to successfully transfer an encrypted game into a durable form, he still cannot share the copy he made with others. He cannot legally distribute it for the purposes of preservation.
Without the (illegal) dissemination, these works are still in danger of expiring before their copyright as those that possess them expire in the traditional sense and even the copies are forgotten.
Effective preservation requires dissemination, because humans themselves (and their intent) aren't sufficiently durable to outlast copyright. And since the law reserves dissemination to the copyright holder, damn straight the law should demand the copyright holder either dissemin
No, copyright on a stone statue would still be for a limited, reasonable amount of time. I don't propose extending copyright for durable items; rather that copyright on materials published in fragile media and intended to be useful for extremely short periods (esp. in context of current copyright duration) should have similarly limited copyright durations.
The copyright I enjoy on a sand castle created on the beach should be less than the time it takes for the tide to wipe it out forever. There's no reason for works that degrade to unusability to enjoy protection of creator's lifetime plus 50 years. (Granted, I'd have a hard time proving infringement of another's sand castle on my washed-out work.)
I'd entertain the possibility that works transferred to a more durable media by the publisher within the limited copyright term of its original media (or other continued publishing of the work) could extend the copyright, but only to the extent that it could have enjoyed from its original publication had it been published on sufficiently durable media.
Such as if I make a durable mold of my sand castle. Even current law would allow me to reclaim my copyright after a period of it lapsing into the public domain by casting a new one from that mold. Similarly, if a game's copyright owner doesn't like his ROMs being distributed freely, he can simply republish his ROMs himself and enjoin others from publishing under his restored copyright.
I'd also amend it to require meaningful publication and not just a periodic private sale of a single copy of a program on an obsolete 8" floppy.
I'd be interested in hearing of these better ways to determine reasonable copyright duration, but the lifetime of the original work is an easily understood metric and emphasizes the need for works to lose protection before they are lost to all forever.
It cannot fall upon the copyright owner to preserve his works for their future entry into the public domain when there is no legal mandate for him to do so. Especially while there are laws preventing anyone else from preserving the same works by copying.
Safari emulates the Web?
It was supposed to be for apps that emulate or interface with real-world devices.
And was one of the justifications Apple had for killing the iCommune plug-in for iTunes: the license to create plug-ins was only for creating interfaces to peripherals, and the Internet didn't qualify.
Then came Safari, which sported the brushed metal interface. Suddenly, Apple feels the Web is a peripheral device?
Apple, don't expect developers to play by the rules when you fail to do so yourself.
In my opinion, it is simply wrong for copyright to continue to be enforced beyond the lifetime of the original work. Why should a 20 year old game cartridge be illegal to copy even when it has ceased to function? Why should a paper placemat at a fast food restaurant enjoy artist's lifetime+50 years when it will cease to exist in less than a month?
Allowing copyright to persist beyond the lifetime of the work itself creates an eternal copyright, especially when the copyright holder takes little to no steps to preserve the work for when^W if it enters the public domain.
And if the only surviving copies are in the hands of the original copyright holder, if the work ever does enter the public domain, that person (or corporate entity) has no incentive to ever publish it again.
All works are not created equal; copyright should not treat them all as equal.
I can see all sorts of messages one can put on their body with reflective paint for all those scanner operators to see.
I don't think the operators of these scanners are going to be a significantly large advertising venue to make backscatter x-ray body paint advertisement viable.
Unless of course the advertiser is GoldenPalace.com. They'll advertise anywhere and take advantage of the bad publicity. Because they don't just want to be famous; they want to be infamous!
What about kids, infants and pregnant women?
What about the person running the machine? That poor screener's going to get more repeated doses than passengers.
But then if he's looking at all the young kids and infants naked via this machine, perhaps he should get dosed, if these totally hairless bleached-out views do indeed become titillating to the operator.
If the contraindicated items show up black and skin shows up white, you'd think they'd realize that a simple modification of inverting the image and a high-pass filter after that would give the screener a visual of the contraband items while preserving the modesty of the citizen.
Yeah, and those particular images of Bugs Bunny are now in the public domain, but if you try to make your own brand-new Bugs Bunny cartoon, you're still going to fall afoul of the Warners lawyers, because Bugs is still a trademark of Warners.
But with computers nowadays, you could isolate every frame of those public domain works, mix and match backgrounds and foregrounds, redo the mouth animation and provide new dialogue. Bingo: new cartoon using existing public domain material.
Unless Warner Bros. can sue for infringement over the voice talent being able to mimic the voice. If that were actionable, then impressionism would become an illegal talent. (You could remix the voices to put the syllables in the right places, but that's a lot of extra expense.)
"They are still actively enforced, and the Supreme Court has consistently held in modern times that a search warrant is not needed to break into your house if it is suspected that you are in the act of sex without the possibility of pregnancy."
So that's why condoms are not 100% effective!
Umm...who confuses "cr" with a "z"???
That would have to be some zacry dyslexic.
Still, that's a very bad failure condition, and a bad first impression. Hopefully the MMOG isn't coded by their web developers.
BTW, it is only a redirection loop if you keep Javascript enabled. Turn off Javascript and it stops, then redirects you to a 404'd noflash page, which only link takes you back through another Javascripted flash check. Only if you enable Javascript and allow cookies can you get to the real no-Flash pages.