Also given the paranoia over security today I cant imagine the US Govt being in any great hurry to allow the masses get airbourne.
True enough. However there's plenty of small aircraft and even small jets available already. I guess only rich people should be allowed personal aircraft. I guess rich people aren't terrorists?
Yeh yeh, get off your soap box. If the security if that good that the only way to stop the kiddy fuckers is to shut it down, I'll accept that, but the internet itself is insecure enough that it's not necessary. The people that monitor this shit are the Police, in my country, and they'll be there undercover and in the scene. Quite simply, if they find kiddie porn proliferating on a particular anonymizing network, steps will be taken to shut either it or the traffic down. There's more options than just outlawing anonymity, but you're the expert so I won't need to explain it...
Sounds easy doesn't it. Problem is that American companies are everywhere in some countries. If I own a telephone (mobile or landline) here in NZ, I'm sending $ to the US. If I watch TV, it's usually American programming. If I turn on the radio, it's probably American music (radio networks are pretty tight with the TV networks...). Even when you *think* you are dealing with a local company it may well be owned by a US company. Still, we can but try.
I personally think music-only networks will just be a "warez" ring for copyright music, not an alternative distribution network for indies...
BUT, you take the bad with the good, and fully anonymous P2P is a good thing for folks who need it. People in countries where freedom is a dirty word, for example.
I doubt the music/general folks will let these freaks on their own networks, but if pedos start using this kind of thing the Police (or whoever monitors this shit) will step in and shut the affected networks down. And fair enough too. Civil suits are one thing, but it's really in the networks interests to keep it criminally legal, lest they find law enforcement tapping on their doors.
IIRC, South Africa was the only country to develop nuclear weapons and then dismantle them. It's nice to see a country with the balls to try to make things better.
I'll have to argue a subtlety there. It's not important "who is using it" only "how". Saddam could have had a shitload of WMDs but as long as he's not lobbing them at anyone (or planning to) I don't really care.
There are 2 ways to get music, buy and and steal it (and please no diatribe on whether steal is the right word).
OK, you *know* it's the wrong word, and yet you use it anyway? You sir, are being an industry shill.
So if you stole it, it should be considered a lost sale, as you obviously wanted the music but chose to steal it instead of buying it.
A "lost sale" is someone stealing a CD off the counter, or even a customer walking out without buying anything because the clerk pissed them off - but we are talking about copying from media that has alrady been bought, not the theft of a product. It's a subtle difference that business doesn't like to acknowledge because all they see is dollars that they didn't get. It's like NOS getting pissy abuot "lost sales" when people build a DIY nitrous system for their car. Sure, they didn't sell a kit to someone who was interested in their stuff, but if the price was closer to the reproduction cost + hassle of DIY, they probably would have. Not being competitive in the market place is the reason they "lose" sales like this, plain and simple.
Once again, it's not a lost sale if you weren't going to get it anyway. I'm interested in lots of music, but I'm not going to buy a $32 NZD industry backed CD because they are a complete rip-off (I also don't download MP3s either). Having said that, I bought a $5 NZD CD of driving music from the gas station last night. Pricing is a key issue - they'll bleat about the cost of producing new music, but if the industry wasn't snorting their profits and spent less playing at being rock stars prices would be more realistic.
And BTW, the same retail vs wholesale thing is the reason (pop star|idol) tops the charts the week of release - nobody bought it except the stores, but the punters see it in the charts and buy it 'cos a) it *must* be good if it's in the charts, b) it's advertised everywhere so it's all they know. The music recording industry is a joke - go down to the pub this weekend and supprt your local bands instead.
Yeh, it's one of those stories that some folks don't to want to publish. I'll put it down to fear of a public panic vs special interest story. Still, even BBC News has picked it up, so I guess it'll filter down eventually.
I've been to Spain, and I met 2 guys who got mugged as I staggering back to the hotel after a big night in Barcelona. Some guys tried to mug me too, but it's all a bit fuzzy now... I still had my wallet and stuff, so I guess it worked out OK.
Anyway, my point is that how long before this gear hits the black market? You'll have guys jumping you and waving a friggin' RF wand over tourists to locate and cut the tag out...
Sounds very convenient, but without user enabled security, I think it's too vulnerable.
They rarely do. Same thing everywhere generally. When ever there's a controversial issue, it's usually a "spokesperson" or a "source" that comments. I wouldn't read too much into it, it's a way for those responsible to hide behind a faceless entity. In this case, I'd say he's trying to avoid repercussions from within the government.
Right - the implementation of ideas. Except it's not, because the USPTO allows processes - ideas themselves - to be patented.
If it was as simple as implementation (binary or even source code), "we" could write a new implementation that was compatible with their one (did the same thing in a different way), and multi-vendor secure TCP comms could happen. Unfortunately it's not that simple because they've likely patented the processes, although we'd have to wait for the patents to be available to see, I think.
This is actually rather risky for Cisco, because they may cut themselves off from everyone else. If OpenBSD indeed has a better and free solution, organisations should be using them. The result then is no secure communications if your non-Cisco equipment talks to Cisco equipment (unless Cisco implements the OpenBSD stuff too...).
Presumably the USPTO is smart enough to shoot down a process patent that's based on published recommendations by a third party, but maybe there's something clever in Cisco's particular implementation that's worthy. Either way, I suspect Cisco has just killed an otherwise reasonable way of doing secure TCP on the public Internet.
And props to people like the OpenBSD guys for being there and continuing to grind out alternative and often better solutions.
Problem is that people are generally not doing that. The way to profit now is not through developing your own product, or even licensing. The most effective way has become buy a patent, lay low, then sue.
What's worse, is that if you realise your idea has been previously patented, you can create a workaround and patent that - so the number of feasable and free solutions drops closer to zero... thus killing free software. Bottom line is that I shouldn't have to pay someone else so I can implement an idea I had at 3 am.
There is a huge criminal justice industry being built around sex offenders now, just as such an industry was built around drug offenders. You better be squeaky clean.
Bollocks. They are there to protect investors not innovators. They are there to maintain a monopoly for a limited time, and come from an age that moved far slower than ours does. They are regularly abused, and they hamper progress more often than they promote it. Go ask anyone with a technical or science perspective rather than a business perspective.
No, you're not the only worried by it. What bugs me is that my lame-ass goverment will jump on this bandwagon too. Your government will say something like anyone flying into the US must be registered in our database - which is shared with airlines and other governments (this already happens with the new microchipped passports). To smooth things out, we'll get scanned when we renew our passports, and hey presto, I'm being automagically monitored by your government next time I'm travelling to Europe. If I unwittingly share a couple of flights with some "suspected insurgents" odds are I'll be politely asked to step aside if I catch a flight to into LA. No sir, I don't like it.
Yeh, back in the day that worked. I'm not so sure it would work in 2004 though, because now the existing companies are on the lookout for low-key competitors and aware of the risks of letting them grow. In the dot.com days, some of the old businesses got hammered pretty hard, but it's less likely now. Your local bookstore couldn't do jack about Amazon, but Amazon will probably sue you for patent infringement if you try to make a better bookstore and put it online.
You think love is bad? Wait till you see the vengence in action. Sure it remembers everything little issue, but using an advanced AI system it creates arbitrary yet realistic scenarios in a multi-threading manner. These can be variously intepreted based on context by others systems reading the disk, which may result in locks and race conditions or possibly even data loss. Love is nice, but wouldn't recommend the post-love vengence patch - best bet is to keep plugging away with what you've got. Don't forget to keep up with maintenance and the system's support needs.
Funny isn't it? The so-called 3rd world will probably be the next safe-haven for software development. Seems like all the "developed" countries are bending over for the companies and for international trade deals that require the same.
/yes, my country is doing that too - and very quietly, all while touting an IT industry windfall Real Soon Now...
Slashdot Mirror
Also given the paranoia over security today I cant imagine the US Govt being in any great hurry to allow the masses get airbourne.
True enough. However there's plenty of small aircraft and even small jets available already. I guess only rich people should be allowed personal aircraft. I guess rich people aren't terrorists?
Yeh yeh, get off your soap box. If the security if that good that the only way to stop the kiddy fuckers is to shut it down, I'll accept that, but the internet itself is insecure enough that it's not necessary. The people that monitor this shit are the Police, in my country, and they'll be there undercover and in the scene. Quite simply, if they find kiddie porn proliferating on a particular anonymizing network, steps will be taken to shut either it or the traffic down. There's more options than just outlawing anonymity, but you're the expert so I won't need to explain it...
Sounds easy doesn't it. Problem is that American companies are everywhere in some countries. If I own a telephone (mobile or landline) here in NZ, I'm sending $ to the US. If I watch TV, it's usually American programming. If I turn on the radio, it's probably American music (radio networks are pretty tight with the TV networks...). Even when you *think* you are dealing with a local company it may well be owned by a US company. Still, we can but try.
Anyways in this case it might be more relavant to define a "software GDP," and for now I think the US would be #1 in that dept.
There are some surprisingly large shops in Germany. SAP AG (the world's largest maker of business- management software) is one that immediately comes to mind. You may be right, but I'd like to see how the numbers actually stack up.
I personally think music-only networks will just be a "warez" ring for copyright music, not an alternative distribution network for indies...
BUT, you take the bad with the good, and fully anonymous P2P is a good thing for folks who need it. People in countries where freedom is a dirty word, for example.
I doubt the music/general folks will let these freaks on their own networks, but if pedos start using this kind of thing the Police (or whoever monitors this shit) will step in and shut the affected networks down. And fair enough too. Civil suits are one thing, but it's really in the networks interests to keep it criminally legal, lest they find law enforcement tapping on their doors.
Biomass -> electricity -> EV power / hydrogen production. Nope, you're car will smell just fine.
IIRC, South Africa was the only country to develop nuclear weapons and then dismantle them. It's nice to see a country with the balls to try to make things better.
I'll have to argue a subtlety there. It's not important "who is using it" only "how". Saddam could have had a shitload of WMDs but as long as he's not lobbing them at anyone (or planning to) I don't really care.
Or to put that another way...
Japan: PWN3D!
USA: Doh!
There are 2 ways to get music, buy and and steal it (and please no diatribe on whether steal is the right word).
OK, you *know* it's the wrong word, and yet you use it anyway? You sir, are being an industry shill.
So if you stole it, it should be considered a lost sale, as you obviously wanted the music but chose to steal it instead of buying it.
A "lost sale" is someone stealing a CD off the counter, or even a customer walking out without buying anything because the clerk pissed them off - but we are talking about copying from media that has alrady been bought, not the theft of a product. It's a subtle difference that business doesn't like to acknowledge because all they see is dollars that they didn't get. It's like NOS getting pissy abuot "lost sales" when people build a DIY nitrous system for their car. Sure, they didn't sell a kit to someone who was interested in their stuff, but if the price was closer to the reproduction cost + hassle of DIY, they probably would have. Not being competitive in the market place is the reason they "lose" sales like this, plain and simple.
Once again, it's not a lost sale if you weren't going to get it anyway. I'm interested in lots of music, but I'm not going to buy a $32 NZD industry backed CD because they are a complete rip-off (I also don't download MP3s either). Having said that, I bought a $5 NZD CD of driving music from the gas station last night. Pricing is a key issue - they'll bleat about the cost of producing new music, but if the industry wasn't snorting their profits and spent less playing at being rock stars prices would be more realistic.
And BTW, the same retail vs wholesale thing is the reason (pop star|idol) tops the charts the week of release - nobody bought it except the stores, but the punters see it in the charts and buy it 'cos a) it *must* be good if it's in the charts, b) it's advertised everywhere so it's all they know. The music recording industry is a joke - go down to the pub this weekend and supprt your local bands instead.
Supposed to be released on May Day. I'm still waiting too...
Yeh, it's one of those stories that some folks don't to want to publish. I'll put it down to fear of a public panic vs special interest story. Still, even BBC News has picked it up, so I guess it'll filter down eventually.
I've been to Spain, and I met 2 guys who got mugged as I staggering back to the hotel after a big night in Barcelona. Some guys tried to mug me too, but it's all a bit fuzzy now... I still had my wallet and stuff, so I guess it worked out OK.
Anyway, my point is that how long before this gear hits the black market? You'll have guys jumping you and waving a friggin' RF wand over tourists to locate and cut the tag out...
Sounds very convenient, but without user enabled security, I think it's too vulnerable.
I think I'm going to start sending them a brick a day. i'll call it the "brick-a-day" club.
That's pretty funny. I wonder if you could send it COD too?
They rarely do. Same thing everywhere generally. When ever there's a controversial issue, it's usually a "spokesperson" or a "source" that comments. I wouldn't read too much into it, it's a way for those responsible to hide behind a faceless entity. In this case, I'd say he's trying to avoid repercussions from within the government.
Right - the implementation of ideas. Except it's not, because the USPTO allows processes - ideas themselves - to be patented.
If it was as simple as implementation (binary or even source code), "we" could write a new implementation that was compatible with their one (did the same thing in a different way), and multi-vendor secure TCP comms could happen. Unfortunately it's not that simple because they've likely patented the processes, although we'd have to wait for the patents to be available to see, I think.
This is actually rather risky for Cisco, because they may cut themselves off from everyone else. If OpenBSD indeed has a better and free solution, organisations should be using them. The result then is no secure communications if your non-Cisco equipment talks to Cisco equipment (unless Cisco implements the OpenBSD stuff too...).
Presumably the USPTO is smart enough to shoot down a process patent that's based on published recommendations by a third party, but maybe there's something clever in Cisco's particular implementation that's worthy. Either way, I suspect Cisco has just killed an otherwise reasonable way of doing secure TCP on the public Internet.
And props to people like the OpenBSD guys for being there and continuing to grind out alternative and often better solutions.
Problem is that people are generally not doing that. The way to profit now is not through developing your own product, or even licensing. The most effective way has become buy a patent, lay low, then sue.
What's worse, is that if you realise your idea has been previously patented, you can create a workaround and patent that - so the number of feasable and free solutions drops closer to zero... thus killing free software. Bottom line is that I shouldn't have to pay someone else so I can implement an idea I had at 3 am.
There is a huge criminal justice industry being built around sex offenders now, just as such an industry was built around drug offenders. You better be squeaky clean.
*Nobody* is squeaky clean.
Bollocks. They are there to protect investors not innovators. They are there to maintain a monopoly for a limited time, and come from an age that moved far slower than ours does. They are regularly abused, and they hamper progress more often than they promote it. Go ask anyone with a technical or science perspective rather than a business perspective.
Given that the patent mentioned in a previous post is dated as filed in 1993, it sound fair to say there was prior art on that one too...
No, you're not the only worried by it. What bugs me is that my lame-ass goverment will jump on this bandwagon too. Your government will say something like anyone flying into the US must be registered in our database - which is shared with airlines and other governments (this already happens with the new microchipped passports). To smooth things out, we'll get scanned when we renew our passports, and hey presto, I'm being automagically monitored by your government next time I'm travelling to Europe. If I unwittingly share a couple of flights with some "suspected insurgents" odds are I'll be politely asked to step aside if I catch a flight to into LA. No sir, I don't like it.
Yeh, back in the day that worked. I'm not so sure it would work in 2004 though, because now the existing companies are on the lookout for low-key competitors and aware of the risks of letting them grow. In the dot.com days, some of the old businesses got hammered pretty hard, but it's less likely now. Your local bookstore couldn't do jack about Amazon, but Amazon will probably sue you for patent infringement if you try to make a better bookstore and put it online.
You sir, deserve a Gold Star.
You think love is bad? Wait till you see the vengence in action. Sure it remembers everything little issue, but using an advanced AI system it creates arbitrary yet realistic scenarios in a multi-threading manner. These can be variously intepreted based on context by others systems reading the disk, which may result in locks and race conditions or possibly even data loss. Love is nice, but wouldn't recommend the post-love vengence patch - best bet is to keep plugging away with what you've got. Don't forget to keep up with maintenance and the system's support needs.
Funny isn't it? The so-called 3rd world will probably be the next safe-haven for software development. Seems like all the "developed" countries are bending over for the companies and for international trade deals that require the same.
/yes, my country is doing that too - and very quietly, all while touting an IT industry windfall Real Soon Now...