Why does this remind me of the cheap-ass old school javascript "You're in the wrong place and we're going to show you your own IP to scare you off" pages from forums and CMSs of old?
Meh. I just use Google's personalized home page with four feeds: Slashdot, Reuters, AP, and FutureFeeder.
This way I have an opportunity to check the news every time I open my browser for something else; just middle click an interesting article and read it if I've finished my hunting and have nothing else to do.
He's not a homophobe in the literal sense - ie: fear of homosexuals. He is in the new GLBT sense - ie: supportive of anything that may be construed as opression of the GLBT community.
In other words, yes, he is homophobic (read: holds a different point of view than that expressed by the GLBT community lobby groups).
Actually, I limit myself to the cheap stuff 'cos I'm poor. Meanwhile, I've HAD expensive wine. Half of it tastes like it was filtered through the back end of a skunk. "Quality" means "Enjoyable". I'm not dropping $50 on something that I have a 50% chance of enjoying when I could drop $7.99 on something I have the same chance of enjoying.
For example, I've never tasted a better red than Little Penguin shiraz. And I've had some EXPENSIVE shiraz (something a friend had me taste - it was $150 a bottle - and it tasted like it was made of wood and dingleberry scrapings.)
After reading several comments to this post, it occurs to me that there is a large number of slashdotters that don't like their assumptions to even smell like they're being challeneged.
For example: Observation == fact: False. Observations are only facts if you're sure your equipment is working right.
Scientific Theory == Always Right: False. Theory's are an approximation to fill observations. They are, thus, only right part of the time. The other parts exist where the equations fail. "Border Conditions" in programming.
Scientific Law == Always Right: False. Theories are made law when the scientists are tired of verifying the theory against observation. Toss an apple at a black hole and see if it still drops on Newton's head. That it, if you're sure your observational equipment's still working in that situation.
The word of a slashdotter == 50% bullshit, 30% web-based research, and 20% biased personal experience: False. From time to time, an intelligent human steps up and says his piece. dada is one of those humans, in my observation. I've even argued with him from time to time, and came off still not thinking he's right. Doesn't mean I can't follow his thought process, nor does it mean the guy doesn't deserve my respect - he thinks damned well.
Total socialism and total capitalism are two extremes of an axis - that being government interference in an economy. "Somewhere in between" is the best bet, as always.
Of course, until we get away from the childish "They stole my idea!" attitude of intellectual property, we're not going to get anywhere.
*grumble* Yeah. IP protects innovation. We, as humans, have been innovating for longer than there's been IP protection. It's bullshit. It shouldn't exist.
Seriously. People still buy CDs even though they can get the music free. Why? It's convenient, prepackaged, and has pretty pictures on it. It's like, why buy a classic book when you can get the text from the Gutenberg project? Simple: Books have something special that text files don't. They're more convienent, more asthetically pleasing, and generally better. If you don't have the cash, you settle for free. If you do, you get the Real Thing (tm).
I'd like to see the numbers for basic core aplications.
For example, on the windows side, problems with the OS and core packages. Things like notepad, control panel, wordpad, etc, and on the linux side, you'd have to do some averaging: Linux 2.4 v 2.6, KDE v. Gnome core apps. Meanwhile a comparison between Openoffice and Office would be in order. It's been a while sice the last good study of how one works next to the other in their 'naitive' environments.
Really simple, actually: C requires less planning, is easier to learn, and is more likely to be guaranteed cross-platform. If you're writing a simple command-line utility for your own use, it's either C or shell scripting.
They'll have their patent revoked if they try to enforce it; patents only stick for "nonobvious" innovation. Reducing your call cost by keeping a table of call costs is pretty much called "comparison shopping". You're right. But I don't think Google will counter sue them for being dicks. Google's getting too close much of that "Evil Empire" image for a PR breakdown like that. They'll probably settle out of court for some insulting (to RTI) sum AFTER Google's patent lawyer has made RTI's patent lawyer feel like a brain-dead eunich.
A good way to packetize information would be to use the structure of something like SquashFS or dmg (both what are called 'block compression' filesystems), but to have them block-encrypted as well.
Process: A connection is initiated. Both sides send a randomly generated public key to their peer. The request-side (Q) asks encryptedly for a given resource. The response side (S) sends out a compressed resource header (a data block containing the compressed sizes and basic checksums of each data block the responder has, as well as a list of others who have requested and recieved part of this resource, and a list of those S has gotten parts of this data from).
Q then requests, randomly chosen from the lists given, the chunk-lists from each new Source. Under a certain S count limit, Q also requests a header block from some of the new S's.
Now starts data transfer. Q encryptedly requests a chunk from an S. The S, using Q's public key encrypts the chunk, and using something fast, compresses it (gzip is good. libucl is better). S sends it along, according to its own bandwidth use limitations. Q doesn't pause, sending requests to n S's, where n is set in the browser's configuration.
There is a question as to how often to generate key pairs. It's a process heavy operation, and all. I think it would probably be best to generate at least one for each requested file, both as Q and as S. If the key pair is generated using a smallish prime - say 128 bits - this wouldn't be too ornerous to those of us with wak processors, and would still be a bitch for any onlookers.
(you'd think the french in government would have learned not to delude themselves into thinking their population likes them. I mean, they've been doing this since they've had a monarchy, seriously.)
Not exactly. If you were to buy one after this law goes into effect, it would be 'fixed'. It will then only record those things the MPAA deems acceptable for you to record.
You know, I've always wondered why media production companies differentiated 'audio' vs. 'data' media, and why 'audio' costs more. I mean, AFAIK, they're all identical - the only differentiators on CDs are rewriatability and max speed, right?
Slashdot Mirror
Why does this remind me of the cheap-ass old school javascript "You're in the wrong place and we're going to show you your own IP to scare you off" pages from forums and CMSs of old?
Meh. I just use Google's personalized home page with four feeds: Slashdot, Reuters, AP, and FutureFeeder.
This way I have an opportunity to check the news every time I open my browser for something else; just middle click an interesting article and read it if I've finished my hunting and have nothing else to do.
He's not a homophobe in the literal sense - ie: fear of homosexuals. He is in the new GLBT sense - ie: supportive of anything that may be construed as opression of the GLBT community.
In other words, yes, he is homophobic (read: holds a different point of view than that expressed by the GLBT community lobby groups).
Sell? Fuck you, make your own.
Actually, I limit myself to the cheap stuff 'cos I'm poor. Meanwhile, I've HAD expensive wine. Half of it tastes like it was filtered through the back end of a skunk. "Quality" means "Enjoyable". I'm not dropping $50 on something that I have a 50% chance of enjoying when I could drop $7.99 on something I have the same chance of enjoying.
For example, I've never tasted a better red than Little Penguin shiraz. And I've had some EXPENSIVE shiraz (something a friend had me taste - it was $150 a bottle - and it tasted like it was made of wood and dingleberry scrapings.)
Me? I NEVER joke. It's all about seriousity with me. Definately seriousity.
Shit. I was channeling Mr. Bush again.
After reading several comments to this post, it occurs to me that there is a large number of slashdotters that don't like their assumptions to even smell like they're being challeneged.
For example:
Observation == fact: False. Observations are only facts if you're sure your equipment is working right.
Scientific Theory == Always Right: False. Theory's are an approximation to fill observations. They are, thus, only right part of the time. The other parts exist where the equations fail. "Border Conditions" in programming.
Scientific Law == Always Right: False. Theories are made law when the scientists are tired of verifying the theory against observation. Toss an apple at a black hole and see if it still drops on Newton's head. That it, if you're sure your observational equipment's still working in that situation.
The word of a slashdotter == 50% bullshit, 30% web-based research, and 20% biased personal experience: False. From time to time, an intelligent human steps up and says his piece. dada is one of those humans, in my observation. I've even argued with him from time to time, and came off still not thinking he's right. Doesn't mean I can't follow his thought process, nor does it mean the guy doesn't deserve my respect - he thinks damned well.
Heh. Really wouldn't make a difference in American elections, now would it?
Meh. At least business schools nowadays are teaching coasean economics rather than machiavellian. Prince-worshippers are asshats, in my experience.
Total socialism and total capitalism are two extremes of an axis - that being government interference in an economy. "Somewhere in between" is the best bet, as always.
Of course, until we get away from the childish "They stole my idea!" attitude of intellectual property, we're not going to get anywhere.
*grumble* Yeah. IP protects innovation. We, as humans, have been innovating for longer than there's been IP protection. It's bullshit. It shouldn't exist.
Seriously. People still buy CDs even though they can get the music free. Why? It's convenient, prepackaged, and has pretty pictures on it. It's like, why buy a classic book when you can get the text from the Gutenberg project? Simple: Books have something special that text files don't. They're more convienent, more asthetically pleasing, and generally better. If you don't have the cash, you settle for free. If you do, you get the Real Thing (tm).
How about "Real property can't be copied"
I'd like to see the numbers for basic core aplications.
For example, on the windows side, problems with the OS and core packages. Things like notepad, control panel, wordpad, etc, and on the linux side, you'd have to do some averaging: Linux 2.4 v 2.6, KDE v. Gnome core apps. Meanwhile a comparison between Openoffice and Office would be in order. It's been a while sice the last good study of how one works next to the other in their 'naitive' environments.
Really simple, actually: C requires less planning, is easier to learn, and is more likely to be guaranteed cross-platform. If you're writing a simple command-line utility for your own use, it's either C or shell scripting.
Please take, for an example, the well-tested sections of the Linux Kernel as an example.
If you have some issues with the performance, reliability or security of Linux, look sidelong to the Mach kernel.
Now, if you don't mind, please pull your heade from your ass.
You know, there are some damn good cheap wines and some bloody awful expensive wines.
Me, I stick to the <$10 stuff. Same percentage of quality at a much better economny.
They'll have their patent revoked if they try to enforce it; patents only stick for "nonobvious" innovation. Reducing your call cost by keeping a table of call costs is pretty much called "comparison shopping". You're right. But I don't think Google will counter sue them for being dicks. Google's getting too close much of that "Evil Empire" image for a PR breakdown like that. They'll probably settle out of court for some insulting (to RTI) sum AFTER Google's patent lawyer has made RTI's patent lawyer feel like a brain-dead eunich.
A good way to packetize information would be to use the structure of something like SquashFS or dmg (both what are called 'block compression' filesystems), but to have them block-encrypted as well.
Process:
A connection is initiated. Both sides send a randomly generated public key to their peer. The request-side (Q) asks encryptedly for a given resource. The response side (S) sends out a compressed resource header (a data block containing the compressed sizes and basic checksums of each data block the responder has, as well as a list of others who have requested and recieved part of this resource, and a list of those S has gotten parts of this data from).
Q then requests, randomly chosen from the lists given, the chunk-lists from each new Source. Under a certain S count limit, Q also requests a header block from some of the new S's.
Now starts data transfer. Q encryptedly requests a chunk from an S. The S, using Q's public key encrypts the chunk, and using something fast, compresses it (gzip is good. libucl is better). S sends it along, according to its own bandwidth use limitations. Q doesn't pause, sending requests to n S's, where n is set in the browser's configuration.
There is a question as to how often to generate key pairs. It's a process heavy operation, and all. I think it would probably be best to generate at least one for each requested file, both as Q and as S. If the key pair is generated using a smallish prime - say 128 bits - this wouldn't be too ornerous to those of us with wak processors, and would still be a bitch for any onlookers.
"Thank you, the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation"
(you'd think the french in government would have learned not to delude themselves into thinking their population likes them. I mean, they've been doing this since they've had a monarchy, seriously.)
Wait.... you're telling me there's a reason to live in France now?!
What IS this world coming to?
OR filter out the orignal CGMS-A and RCI, then add them in manually to "Redistributable"
*yawn*
Let me clarify what I mean:
You need several side-bands to the TV bands (on NTSC RCA, it's actually five bands: R, G, B, Left, and Right), as well as VEIL on the TV bands.
So, put in a pass filter to mask out the extra bands, then add noise to the signal at the same signal strength as a detected VEIL signal.
Broken.
Hey, question: Does it outlaw signal filters? *smirk*
Not exactly. If you were to buy one after this law goes into effect, it would be 'fixed'. It will then only record those things the MPAA deems acceptable for you to record.
You know, I've always wondered why media production companies differentiated 'audio' vs. 'data' media, and why 'audio' costs more. I mean, AFAIK, they're all identical - the only differentiators on CDs are rewriatability and max speed, right?