"it was an XviD of Walking Tall, which was made by MGM"
Ok, bad argument, bittorrent is two way, so there is sharing... still stands if they are the ones who originated the torrent to collect IP's of people who d/l... this gota be unlikely though.
"it was an XviD of Walking Tall, which was made by MGM"
Maybe I'm not reading this right, but this is NOTHING like the RIAA, this is for DOWNLOADING, not SHARING, and not just that it's for downloading something that the plaintiff has created and put up for distribution, entrapment anyone?
On second though, can't be, can it - if they put up the.torrent themselves... sorry, it just doesn't make any sense...
Wouldn't be able to do it - the billing happens on their end (your phone needs a valid id to which it's use is billed - if you reverse engineer and build a new phone this will need to work as well for you to make calls, and therefore you will still pay). What am I thinking, the phones are not even built by the networks - so what's your argument?
This is more along the lines of somebody making walkie-talkies and then saying that nobody else can make a compatible walkie-talkie.
This is going against my 'not free as in beer argument' but, actually you could, ITMS provides RANDOM 30 second samples, so unless there are certain parts of the song which it is set to never provide, you could query it multiple times and eventually get the whole song (in overlapping parts).
The.mp4's you get seem to be locked though, but PlayFair should work on that I guess.
Potentially all the parts are in place to get free, non-DRM'ed songs and not just from the US... but the effort involved (in initial coding, or straight out use) would be more than the alternatives.
Something happens to ITMS? Won't affect you in the slightest (well, except authorizing new computers - obviously). Try this: authorize a computer, purchase some music, now unplug the network cable - music still plays, see?
This will also work as a work around to getting more computers authorized - if ITMS lets you de-authorize a computer after it 'dies' (don't know about adding to their libraries though, but should be ok). Authorize a computer, load music onto it, now block all connections to/from ITMS, call ITMS, say your computer dies and you want to de-authorize it, repeat with another computer (until they catch on?)...
Keep in mind that Apple may not even care about 'getting it back' as was the case with the studios and DeCSS, it's profits are not directly affected since the music store is not profitable, iPods are, and the only downside is the labels complaining. So as long as Apple is seen to be making an effort (for the program not to be readily available) that's all that's required.
Keep in mind that everything Apple has done has been to remove the program, not to go after the author.
Sorry, but that is ridiculous, by the same argument you could say that the GPL code in tivo is misused. Nowhere does the GPL say anything about the hardware the code you modify has to run on, as long as you make it available.
Taken generally the argument makes even less sense - then no GPL code should be hardware specific at all - since who decides what the 'generic' hardware is?
"the next large clusters I'm aware of are government or military owned."... "it seems like the attackers tried to do little more than see how much access they could get."
C'mon, just make the connection already, airport security is mentioned at the end, and al Qaeda is mentioned earlier...
On the other hand it's probably just somebody trying to brute force a PGP key they lost:)
"Developers focus on features in their software, rather than ensuring that they have a solid core."
You are kidding right? This is probably so much more true of proprietary software (to bring up the obvious - there is no open source clippy). Except for that, it's hard to disagree with the interface and documentation arguments on the whole, however keep in mind the rapid development pace that some open source projects move at, if you look just at the 'stable' projects you will usually find much better interfaces and documentation.
Administrative Contact:
DNS Admin (NIC-1467103) Google Inc.
2400 E. Bayshore Pkwy Mountain View CA 94043 US
dns-admin@google.com +1.6503300100 Fax-+1.6506188571
Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
DNS Admin (NIC-1467103) Google Inc.
2400 E. Bayshore Pkwy Mountain View CA 94043 US
dns-admin@google.com +1.6503300100 Fax- +1.6506188571
Created on..............: 1995-Aug-13.
Expires on..............: 2006-Aug-12.
Record last updated on..: 2004-Mar-31 16:50:22.
Had a similar problem on the 40 GB iPod, 'factory resetting' it with the firmware update seemed to fix the problem (firmware is reloaded, even though it's the same version). Probably a bad load of the firmware at the factory, but that's just a guess.
That would definitely be more interesting, but getting on a trajectory to the sun would be harder (ignoring the targeting etc.) the 'balance' (whatever the scientific term is) point between the Earth's and the sun's gravity is further away from Earth than that of the moon. You never fully 'escape' the gravity of an object, just that the gravity of the other object becomes stronger and so you are attracted to that (eg. tides are effects of the moons gravity, can also use this as a, poor, example since there are no tides as the sun passes over, therefore weaker force, therefore 'balance' point is further away).
Anybody with better knowledge of astrophysics can explain this?
Potential financial liability is likely to be covered by insurance (which will be costly no doubt), which anything that can reasonably be expected to fly and has adequate funding to get it to outer space should be able to afford.
Keep in mind that stuff like this will not be launched form populated areas (deserts, etc. probably) so any liability only comes in if it can make it far enough to hit something, which in itself is a sign that it has potential, and so is more likely to be sufficiently safe. Think of it this way: conditional on it being able to make it as far as a populated area the probability that it will crash it low.
It would be nice if things worked that way, but let's face it - in reality the don't. Historically the US has mainly gotten involved in wars out of personal reasons (WW2 - attacked by Japan, Vietnam - fear of the spread of communism which led them to support an unpopular government).
What if people democratically choose not to have a democracy (say a dictator is elected)? Singapore is doing quite well with a show-democracy, many middle eastern states (citizens) prosper under dictatorships due to rich natural resources. Whether or not Iraqi's are on the whole better off right now is not certain, potentially it is better to have the few tortured and killed while the majority has some stability instead of having everyone live in utter chaos (here's for no PC opinion).
Democracy IS simply doing what the majority wants. Doing the 'right thing' is based on personal, subjective, beliefs.
Well, why should my Canadian tax money be spent by my Canadian government to fight terrorism? Lets face it - it's you guys south of the border who are the main target - and I'm not giving up my tax dollars or civil liberties to protect you.
So, tough luck.
Whether or not the problem is caused by 'Americans not being nice' or a general hostility to the west, Canada just doesn't feature like such a main target (hmm, CN tower maybe?) - we didn't even support the war in Iraq. So please raise your taxes, increase your deficit, spend it all on defense and reducing your civil liberties, while we, quite frankly, just DO NOT CARE.
It's only a matter of time, well until Xgrid matures and then the render farm will be switched over as well.
Hmm, maybe Virginia Tech was something of a test for them as well (yes, I know, initially G5 desktops, now switching to Xserves, probably quite different software as well)
It's amazing how quickly any discussion reaches the point of worrying about "what if", "someone with malicious intent"...
Is this going to be the new thing to stop the potential advancement of any new technology? Really this should be a non issue - the equivalent would be your local hardware store worrying about selling boards, nails, and hammers - all at once! And god forbid to the same person (what if someone with malicious intent combines the three to obtain a board with a nail at the end?).
Sorry, but you are mistaken, there are RFID Readers available for ANYONE to buy. Wallmart has used RFID tags and readers to track Gillete razors (look it up yourself).
What makes me wonder is how 'complete bullshit' gets modded up...
Just look at it this way - there's mention of terrorism, and 911 (I do hope they use 'emergency services phone number' during the hearings, for the guy's sake) + a load of stuff the average judge/jury doesn't understand.
Slashdot Mirror
I, well, by RIAA's logic actually, also suggest prison time - hey, it's only fair, they did benefit financially from this.
"it was an XviD of Walking Tall, which was made by MGM"
Ok, bad argument, bittorrent is two way, so there is sharing... still stands if they are the ones who originated the torrent to collect IP's of people who d/l... this gota be unlikely though.
"it was an XviD of Walking Tall, which was made by MGM"
.torrent themselves... sorry, it just doesn't make any sense...
Maybe I'm not reading this right, but this is NOTHING like the RIAA, this is for DOWNLOADING, not SHARING, and not just that it's for downloading something that the plaintiff has created and put up for distribution, entrapment anyone?
On second though, can't be, can it - if they put up the
Wouldn't be able to do it - the billing happens on their end (your phone needs a valid id to which it's use is billed - if you reverse engineer and build a new phone this will need to work as well for you to make calls, and therefore you will still pay). What am I thinking, the phones are not even built by the networks - so what's your argument?
This is more along the lines of somebody making walkie-talkies and then saying that nobody else can make a compatible walkie-talkie.
This is going against my 'not free as in beer argument' but, actually you could, ITMS provides RANDOM 30 second samples, so unless there are certain parts of the song which it is set to never provide, you could query it multiple times and eventually get the whole song (in overlapping parts).
.mp4's you get seem to be locked though, but PlayFair should work on that I guess.
The
Potentially all the parts are in place to get free, non-DRM'ed songs and not just from the US... but the effort involved (in initial coding, or straight out use) would be more than the alternatives.
Descriptions isn't: "listen and search for Apple iTunes music " ... " for the ~600kb downloadable MP4 snippets to be heard."
Title probably implies free as in speech (can be accessed from anywhere) rather than beer (you get free songs)
Something happens to ITMS? Won't affect you in the slightest (well, except authorizing new computers - obviously). Try this: authorize a computer, purchase some music, now unplug the network cable - music still plays, see?
This will also work as a work around to getting more computers authorized - if ITMS lets you de-authorize a computer after it 'dies' (don't know about adding to their libraries though, but should be ok). Authorize a computer, load music onto it, now block all connections to/from ITMS, call ITMS, say your computer dies and you want to de-authorize it, repeat with another computer (until they catch on?)...
Keep in mind that Apple may not even care about 'getting it back' as was the case with the studios and DeCSS, it's profits are not directly affected since the music store is not profitable, iPods are, and the only downside is the labels complaining. So as long as Apple is seen to be making an effort (for the program not to be readily available) that's all that's required.
Keep in mind that everything Apple has done has been to remove the program, not to go after the author.
Sorry, but that is ridiculous, by the same argument you could say that the GPL code in tivo is misused. Nowhere does the GPL say anything about the hardware the code you modify has to run on, as long as you make it available.
Taken generally the argument makes even less sense - then no GPL code should be hardware specific at all - since who decides what the 'generic' hardware is?
"the next large clusters I'm aware of are government or military owned." ... "it seems like the attackers tried to do little more than see how much access they could get."
:)
C'mon, just make the connection already, airport security is mentioned at the end, and al Qaeda is mentioned earlier...
On the other hand it's probably just somebody trying to brute force a PGP key they lost
Priceless, can't wait for that Windows port they mention :)
"Developers focus on features in their software, rather than ensuring that they have a solid core."
You are kidding right? This is probably so much more true of proprietary software (to bring up the obvious - there is no open source clippy). Except for that, it's hard to disagree with the interface and documentation arguments on the whole, however keep in mind the rapid development pace that some open source projects move at, if you look just at the 'stable' projects you will usually find much better interfaces and documentation.
Never the less, http://www.gchrist.com/ does exist, and as for gpony.com:
...so don't be so sure.
Registrant:
Google Inc. (DOM-425410)
2400 E. Bayshore Pkwy Mountain View CA 94043 US
Domain Name: gpony.com
Registrar Name: Alldomains.com
Registrar Whois: whois.alldomains.com
Registrar Homepage: http://www.alldomains.com
Administrative Contact:
DNS Admin (NIC-1467103) Google Inc.
2400 E. Bayshore Pkwy Mountain View CA 94043 US
dns-admin@google.com +1.6503300100 Fax-+1.6506188571
Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
DNS Admin (NIC-1467103) Google Inc.
2400 E. Bayshore Pkwy Mountain View CA 94043 US
dns-admin@google.com +1.6503300100 Fax- +1.6506188571
Created on..............: 1995-Aug-13.
Expires on..............: 2006-Aug-12.
Record last updated on..: 2004-Mar-31 16:50:22.
Domain servers in listed order:
NS1.GOOGLE.COM 216.239.32.10
NS2.GOOGLE.COM 216.239.34.10
NS3.GOOGLE.COM 216.239.36.10
NS4.GOOGLE.COM 216.239.38.10
Had a similar problem on the 40 GB iPod, 'factory resetting' it with the firmware update seemed to fix the problem (firmware is reloaded, even though it's the same version). Probably a bad load of the firmware at the factory, but that's just a guess.
That would definitely be more interesting, but getting on a trajectory to the sun would be harder (ignoring the targeting etc.) the 'balance' (whatever the scientific term is) point between the Earth's and the sun's gravity is further away from Earth than that of the moon. You never fully 'escape' the gravity of an object, just that the gravity of the other object becomes stronger and so you are attracted to that (eg. tides are effects of the moons gravity, can also use this as a, poor, example since there are no tides as the sun passes over, therefore weaker force, therefore 'balance' point is further away).
Anybody with better knowledge of astrophysics can explain this?
10kg nuclear device... makes me think of briefcase nukes... which make me think of terrorist links...
So that was their plan all along - to blow up the moon? (was Dr. Evil consulted?)
Potential financial liability is likely to be covered by insurance (which will be costly no doubt), which anything that can reasonably be expected to fly and has adequate funding to get it to outer space should be able to afford.
Keep in mind that stuff like this will not be launched form populated areas (deserts, etc. probably) so any liability only comes in if it can make it far enough to hit something, which in itself is a sign that it has potential, and so is more likely to be sufficiently safe. Think of it this way: conditional on it being able to make it as far as a populated area the probability that it will crash it low.
It would be nice if things worked that way, but let's face it - in reality the don't. Historically the US has mainly gotten involved in wars out of personal reasons (WW2 - attacked by Japan, Vietnam - fear of the spread of communism which led them to support an unpopular government).
What if people democratically choose not to have a democracy (say a dictator is elected)? Singapore is doing quite well with a show-democracy, many middle eastern states (citizens) prosper under dictatorships due to rich natural resources. Whether or not Iraqi's are on the whole better off right now is not certain, potentially it is better to have the few tortured and killed while the majority has some stability instead of having everyone live in utter chaos (here's for no PC opinion).
Democracy IS simply doing what the majority wants. Doing the 'right thing' is based on personal, subjective, beliefs.
Well, why should my Canadian tax money be spent by my Canadian government to fight terrorism? Lets face it - it's you guys south of the border who are the main target - and I'm not giving up my tax dollars or civil liberties to protect you.
So, tough luck.
Whether or not the problem is caused by 'Americans not being nice' or a general hostility to the west, Canada just doesn't feature like such a main target (hmm, CN tower maybe?) - we didn't even support the war in Iraq. So please raise your taxes, increase your deficit, spend it all on defense and reducing your civil liberties, while we, quite frankly, just DO NOT CARE.
"secretly collect the fingprints of people who attend radical anti-American mosques"
Freedom of association?
No? Doesn't ring a bell?
Wonders why Americans complained so much about the civil rights violations in USSR and now in China...
It's only a matter of time, well until Xgrid matures and then the render farm will be switched over as well.
Hmm, maybe Virginia Tech was something of a test for them as well (yes, I know, initially G5 desktops, now switching to Xserves, probably quite different software as well)
Just when I though there was no way Disney could potentially do worse...
Well, you are right - that would do it.
It's amazing how quickly any discussion reaches the point of worrying about "what if", "someone with malicious intent"...
Is this going to be the new thing to stop the potential advancement of any new technology? Really this should be a non issue - the equivalent would be your local hardware store worrying about selling boards, nails, and hammers - all at once! And god forbid to the same person (what if someone with malicious intent combines the three to obtain a board with a nail at the end?).
Sorry, but you are mistaken, there are RFID Readers available for ANYONE to buy. Wallmart has used RFID tags and readers to track Gillete razors (look it up yourself).
What makes me wonder is how 'complete bullshit' gets modded up...
Just look at it this way - there's mention of terrorism, and 911 (I do hope they use 'emergency services phone number' during the hearings, for the guy's sake) + a load of stuff the average judge/jury doesn't understand.
This guy is going to fry...