Okay, I RTFA'ed, and it looks good. Hope they can keep the 80%. I wonder if I can pester U of Wisc at Madison to fund a $10 million Apple supercomputer.
By the way, I just downloaded iTunes for Windows from Apple's site. Apple is really basking in the sunlight here....
Looking for Madonna? There are two tracks available. Garth Brooks has just one, a duet with Trisha Yearwood. And the Beatles? All the hits from John, Paul, George and Ringo are available - but performed on panpipes.
panpipes? Jerk, can't even spell bagpipes. and isn't it obvious it was an issue with his older computer if Napster worked on his second computer w/o any problems? Stupid computer-phobic journalists like this are causing the tech world problems...
Subject: [IP] The Bernstein Cryptography Case Is Dismissed
From: Dave Farber
To: ip@v2.listbox.com
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 17:41:19 -0400
Delivered-To: dfarber+@ux13.sp.cs.cmu.edu
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 17:19:29 -0400
From: "Peter D. Junger"
Subject: The Bernstein Cryptography Case Is Dismissed
To: Dave Farber
For IP if you consider it suitable.
This inconclusive ending of the Bernstein case is a consequence
of the government's policy in cases where there are first amendment
challenges to restrictions on the publication of software to claim
that they have no intention of enforcing the law as it is written
and thus getting the cases dismissed as moot.
The end result is that, though Bernstein had originally won in both
the District Court and the 9th Circuit and I lost my later-filed
case involving much the same issues---Junger v. Daley---in the
federal District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, it is the 6th
Circuit Court of Appeal's decision reversing the District Court's
decision in Junger v. Daley that is the leading case holding that
computer programs are speech that is protected by the First Amendment.
In the Bernstein case, when the government amended the regulations
forbidding the publication of computer programs, the 9th Circuit
Court of Appeals withdrew its earlier opinion in Bernstein's favor
and remanded the case to the district court, where the government
claimed that they would not enforce the restrictions on cryptography
against Dan Bernstein. In my case, on the other hand, the 6th
Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the District Court's holding that
the First Amendment does protect those who would publish software and
then remanded the case to the District Court for further proceedings.
At that point, rather than risking our victory in the 6th Circuit,
we settled my case, even though the new regulations were---and
are---constitutionally questionable.
Although my case is now the leading case holding that publishing
software is protected by the First Amendment, I do not believe
that we would have had our success without the efforts of Dan
Bernstein and his lawyers from the Electronic Freedom Foundation.
------- Forwarded Message
From: "D. J. Bernstein"
To: export@list.cr.yp.to
Subject: Crypto Case On Indefinite Hold
PRESS RELEASE
Contact: Daniel J. Bernstein, press-20031015@box.cr.yp.to
CRYPTO CASE ON INDEFINITE HOLD
Chicago, 15 October 2003 - The longest-running court case against the
government's encryption regulations has come to an end, for now.
The regulations were challenged by Daniel J. Bernstein, a professor of
mathematics, statistics, and computer science at the University of
Illinois at Chicago. Bernstein filed his lawsuit in February 1995 and
won four court decisions against the constitutionality of the
government's previous regulations.
In an October 2002 court hearing on the current encryption regulations,
Department of Justice attorney Tony Coppolino told the court that the
government would not enforce several portions of the regulations.
``I can assure you that the regulatory authority does not want
[researchers who are collaborating at conferences] sending us an e-mail
every time they change something in an algorithm,'' Coppolino told the
court. Coppolino also said that commmercial book publishers and
assembly-language publishers did not need to obtain licenses.
As observers predicted after the hearing, Chief Judge Marilyn Hall Patel
of the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California relied on the government's promises and dismissed Bernstein's
case without deciding the constitutionality of the current regulations.
``If and when there is a concrete threat of enforcement against
Bernstein for a specific activity, Bernstein may return for judicial
resolution of that dispute,'' Patel wrote, after citing Coppolino's
``repeated assurances that Bernstein is not prohibited from engaging in
his activities.''
``I hope the government sticks to its promises and leaves me alone,''
Bernstein said in a statement today acknowledging Patel's decision.
``But if they change their mind and start harassing Internet-security
researchers, I'll be back.''
Hit them with a DOS. Write up a simple program to keep requesting the SiteFinder "service" every second, and leave it on overnight. It's your patriotic duty!
Sorry, got a 500 Server error when posting that, and didn't Plain Text it.
ClearSpeed Announces CS301 Multi-Threaded Array Processor to Deliver High Performance Computing and Power Efficiency October 14th, 2003
Highest Floating Point Performance Chip Executes Complex Mathematical Applications in a Fraction of the Power and Time.
SAN JOSE, Calif., October 14th, 2003 -- ClearSpeed Technology, a leading provider of high performance, low power chip-based solutions, today announced the ClearSpeed CS301, a multi-threaded array processor that enables dramatic improvements in performance and power consumption for intensive floating point applications. At over 25 GFLOPS peak performance, the new chip provides more than twice the processing speed of competitive products. At 10 GFLOPS per Watt, power consumption is also twenty times more efficient. As a result, the CS301 delivers up to a ninety percent reduction in purchase price and running costs, making high performance computing affordable and available to companies of all sizes.
"With conventional processor design, increasing performance has tended to come with real penalties in power consumption and heat dissipation, to the point where computing cannot keep up with the demands of today's emerging applications and rapidly increasing volumes of data," said Tom Beese, CEO of ClearSpeed Technology. "The CS301 is designed specifically to meet those needs with high performance, power efficiency and full programmability in C combined into a single chip. The CS301 is the first in a family of ClearSpeed microprocessors that we believe will challenge present day thinking by creating a world where scientists, bio-informaticians, engineers and content creators alike can have access to high performance computing anywhere, anytime."
The CS301 is based on a multi-threaded array processing (MTAP) architecture and includes 64 processing elements, 384 Kbytes of on-chip SRAM and I/O ports interconnecting through ClearSpeed's ClearConnect(R) bus. Each processing element has its own floating point units, local memory and I/O capability, making the CS301 ideally suited for applications which have high processing or bandwidth requirements. The ClearConnect bus is a packet switched network that provides high bandwidth and low power consumption, supporting multiple concurrent transfers giving even higher aggregate bandwidth.
As a result, complex mathematically based applications such as, computational biology and drug discovery, digital content creation, nanotechnology development, scientific research and financial modelling can now be executed in a fraction of the time.
"We are gratified to see the immediate high level of interest displayed by OEM's in the overall system improvements enabled by the CS301," said Mike Calise, president of ClearSpeed U.S. "The dual benefit of performance and efficiency is empowering companies to accelerate existing applications as well as inspiring them to explore new applications that were previously inaccessible."
The CS301 can serve either as a co-processor alongside an Intel or AMD CPU within a high performance workstation, blade server or cluster configuration, or as a standalone processor for embedded DSP applications like radar pulse compression or image processing. In applications where the CS301 is acting as a co-processor, dynamic libraries offload an application's inner loops to the CS301. Although these inner loops only make up a small portion of the source code, these loops are responsible for the vast majority of the application's running time. By offloading the inner loops, the CS301 can bypass the traditional bottleneck caused by a CPU's limited mathematical capability, executing the core of the application more than twice as fast as anything else in the marketplace.
"To deliver such high levels of performance with full programmability and outstanding gains in power efficiency is a very significant achievement," said Chris Piercy, president and chairman of the Northern Californ
ClearSpeed Announces CS301 Multi-Threaded Array Processor to Deliver High Performance Computing and Power Efficiency
October 14th, 2003
Highest Floating Point Performance Chip Executes Complex Mathematical Applications in a Fraction of the Power and Time.
SAN JOSE, Calif., October 14th, 2003 -- ClearSpeed Technology, a leading provider of high performance, low power chip-based solutions, today announced the ClearSpeed CS301, a multi-threaded array processor that enables dramatic improvements in performance and power consumption for intensive floating point applications. At over 25 GFLOPS peak performance, the new chip provides more than twice the processing speed of competitive products. At 10 GFLOPS per Watt, power consumption is also twenty times more efficient. As a result, the CS301 delivers up to a ninety percent reduction in purchase price and running costs, making high performance computing affordable and available to companies of all sizes.
"With conventional processor design, increasing performance has tended to come with real penalties in power consumption and heat dissipation, to the point where computing cannot keep up with the demands of today's emerging applications and rapidly increasing volumes of data," said Tom Beese, CEO of ClearSpeed Technology. "The CS301 is designed specifically to meet those needs with high performance, power efficiency and full programmability in C
combined into a single chip. The CS301 is the first in a family of ClearSpeed microprocessors that we believe will challenge present day thinking by creating a world where scientists, bio-informaticians, engineers and content creators alike can have access to high performance computing anywhere, anytime."
The CS301 is based on a multi-threaded array processing (MTAP) architecture and includes 64 processing elements, 384 Kbytes of on-chip SRAM and I/O ports interconnecting through ClearSpeed's ClearConnect(R) bus. Each processing element has its own floating point units, local memory and I/O capability, making the CS301 ideally suited for applications which have high processing or bandwidth requirements. The ClearConnect bus is a packet switched network that provides high bandwidth and low power consumption, supporting multiple concurrent transfers giving even higher aggregate bandwidth.
As a result, complex mathematically based applications such as, computational biology and drug discovery, digital content creation, nanotechnology development, scientific research and financial modelling can now be executed in a fraction of the time.
"We are gratified to see the immediate high level of interest displayed by OEM's in the overall system improvements enabled by the CS301," said Mike Calise, president of ClearSpeed U.S. "The dual benefit of performance and efficiency is empowering companies to accelerate existing applications as well as inspiring them to explore new applications that were previously inaccessible."
The CS301 can serve either as a co-processor alongside an Intel or AMD CPU within a high performance workstation, blade server or cluster configuration, or as a standalone processor for embedded DSP applications like radar pulse compression or image processing. In applications where the CS301 is acting as a co-processor, dynamic libraries offload an application's inner loops to the CS301. Although these inner loops only make up a small portion of the source code, these loops are responsible for the vast majority of the application's running time. By offloading the inner loops, the CS301 can bypass the traditional bottleneck caused by a CPU's limited mathematical capability, executing the core of the application more than twice as fast as anything else in the marketplace.
"To deliver such high levels of performance with full programmability and outstanding gains in power efficiency is a very significant achievement," said Chris Piercy, president and chairman of the Northern California Nanotechnology Initiative. "We believe this technology will accelerate the development of nanotechnology and its applications across various
Easy. We can allow everybody to view all messages, but randomly pick 1 out of 20 people and require that person to rate the article. Obviously we can't do the picking on the client side, we'd have to figure out a way to do it server side
Who wants to bet that AOL will be cannabalizing it's own user base with the launch of this Netscape online? Think about it. Most AOLers just want a simple way to get online, and don't like the $23.95 AOL cost, so a lot of them will just switch to the netscape online service.
What they have to do is create a/. type system. For example, everyone would be able to rate the quality of the information, so information that is of high value is "modded up", and the poor information, the insulting/wrong info is modded down. Unless they install a rating system, the entire project is going to all the nutcases who believe all sorts of trashy things.
Or what about Freenet? Barring the troubles it's had recently, it might be useful. And couldn't the MIT researchers be sued anyway for just starting this program? The RIAA sued Sharman Networks, even though they don't have control over what Kazaa distributes.
Anyone having trouble accessing the website? All I get is:
Problem in Database Connection
This Website is powered by PostNuke
Although this site is running the PostNuke software it has no other connection to the PostNuke Developers. Please refrain from sending messages about this site or its content to the PostNuke team, the end will result in an ignored e-mail.
This email is in response to the cease and desist letter received by Colin and Vlad. I am responding because Colin and Vlad are minors. Me, Mr. Dean Beeler, am the only individual of majority age subject of this communcation.
Jun, I am very disappointed with you. I contacted Roland first to prevent such legal harrassment. Roland did not even seem to care about my work until I brought to attention the fact that Roland had lost the copyright on the said material in question. Your lawyer cites 17 U.S.C. section 102(a). "original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression." As stated in a previous conversation, this law only applies to works fixed after 1989. The MT-32 ROM was fixed in 1987. I refer your attorney to 17 U.S.C. section 405 regarding audio fixed before 1989. Since Roland failed to satisfy any of the three requirements in 405(a), Roland lost the copyright on the said samples. Jun, you argued that there are duplicate samples between the SC-55 and the MT-32. This is not literally true. Only a single audio sample matches between the SC-55 and the MT-32, and even this sample is not an identical copy due to format differences. Finally, I will bring Roland's attention to the fact that they filed the copyright on the SC-55 samples with no claim to the underlying work. As such, since the copies are not exact, and no claim is made on the actual sound a "tibale" makes (since it occurs naturally is hence something uncopyrightable), there is nothing in common between the MT-32 and SC-55.
Shame on you. As lawyers, you should know that the burden of proof regarding copyright lies with the individual claiming the copyright. Regarding damages, since I first contacted Roland demanding proof of copyright (which Roland failed to provide) our case would fall under one of innocent infringement. As such, any damanges Roland could claim would be nil. Since no money is being made regarding any use of the samples, no punitive damages what-so-ever can be claimed. Finally, since the MT-32 samples are no longer being licensed in marketable hardware, Roland will also have a difficult time proving they have lost income due to any proven copyright infringement. Again, I ask for proof that Roland satisfied any of the terms specified in 17 U.S.C. section 405. If Roland has not, than any case brought against us would be frivilous and would be subject to countersuit.
No offending material is presently on the site. The ROM is not available anywhere and can only be made available by making a copy using the description provided. The DMCA does not apply in this instance because no Digital Rights Management (DRM) hardware is built into the MT-32 or the ROM. The DMCA only applies when copy protection measures are circumvented to make copies. Copyright law does grant an individual one additional copy for archival purposes. As such, the simple act of copying the ROM does not constitute a violation.
With regard to the claim that reverse engineering has been done: No reverse engineering has been done. No DRM encoding or encryption is used in the ROM. The only conversion that needed to be done was converting the file from decibel measurements to PCM measurements. This is not copy protection. The ROM is stored this way because decibel measurements are a more efficent means of storage for the MT-32's design. It just so happens that PCM is now the most effective means of storage on modern machines. If this is illegal, then RF modulator use is illegal when used to convert the output of a DVD player's composite signal to coax in order that a person can watch DVD's on an older TV. No decryption is done, just conversion from one generation of technology to the other.
No, the ROM is not available and has never been made availble on the site. On clicking the link that reads, "Original ROM", a window pops up that reads, "On request only." This is to verify that the individual indeed owns their own MT-32, there by making copy ownership legal (and to hopeful
No, you should come up with a solution, patent it, license it for free with the proviso that you're not a spammer, then when spammers have to get the technology (and the license that goes along with it) and continue to spam anyway, you hit them with DMCA and:
PROFIT!!!
Just a quick question: if you find a script kiddie who's been DOSing your site (let's say he's 12) can you sue him for damages? Would the parents get blamed and have to pay for damages?
I don't know what you're complaining about, but this is a Good Thing(TM). If we can connect spam with lots of other illegal/immoral behavior, like the RIAA is connecting P2P with child porn, we can get public support on our side and get an anti-spam federal law into place.
Slashdot Mirror
Okay, I RTFA'ed, and it looks good. Hope they can keep the 80%. I wonder if I can pester U of Wisc at Madison to fund a $10 million Apple supercomputer.
By the way, I just downloaded iTunes for Windows from Apple's site. Apple is really basking in the sunlight here....
You want a /., I'll help you. I'm reloading as fast as possible on your site.
If the Big Mac cluster achieves 60% of peak
They ALREADY achieved 80% of peak, is the submitter listening?
I would, then take all of my enemies out to dinner, on me. Then, somehow, a bit of Red Hat goodness will be filling their drinks....
Looking for Madonna? There are two tracks available. Garth Brooks has just one, a duet with Trisha Yearwood. And the Beatles? All the hits from John, Paul, George and Ringo are available - but performed on panpipes.
panpipes? Jerk, can't even spell bagpipes. and isn't it obvious it was an issue with his older computer if Napster worked on his second computer w/o any problems? Stupid computer-phobic journalists like this are causing the tech world problems...
Subject: [IP] The Bernstein Cryptography Case Is Dismissed
From: Dave Farber To: ip@v2.listbox.com Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 17:41:19 -0400 Delivered-To: dfarber+@ux13.sp.cs.cmu.edu Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 17:19:29 -0400 From: "Peter D. Junger" Subject: The Bernstein Cryptography Case Is Dismissed To: Dave Farber
For IP if you consider it suitable.
This inconclusive ending of the Bernstein case is a consequence of the government's policy in cases where there are first amendment challenges to restrictions on the publication of software to claim that they have no intention of enforcing the law as it is written and thus getting the cases dismissed as moot.
The end result is that, though Bernstein had originally won in both the District Court and the 9th Circuit and I lost my later-filed case involving much the same issues---Junger v. Daley---in the federal District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, it is the 6th Circuit Court of Appeal's decision reversing the District Court's decision in Junger v. Daley that is the leading case holding that computer programs are speech that is protected by the First Amendment. In the Bernstein case, when the government amended the regulations forbidding the publication of computer programs, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals withdrew its earlier opinion in Bernstein's favor and remanded the case to the district court, where the government claimed that they would not enforce the restrictions on cryptography against Dan Bernstein. In my case, on the other hand, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the District Court's holding that the First Amendment does protect those who would publish software and then remanded the case to the District Court for further proceedings. At that point, rather than risking our victory in the 6th Circuit, we settled my case, even though the new regulations were---and are---constitutionally questionable.
Although my case is now the leading case holding that publishing software is protected by the First Amendment, I do not believe that we would have had our success without the efforts of Dan Bernstein and his lawyers from the Electronic Freedom Foundation.
------- Forwarded Message
From: "D. J. Bernstein" To: export@list.cr.yp.to Subject: Crypto Case On Indefinite Hold
PRESS RELEASE
Contact: Daniel J. Bernstein, press-20031015@box.cr.yp.to
CRYPTO CASE ON INDEFINITE HOLD
Chicago, 15 October 2003 - The longest-running court case against the government's encryption regulations has come to an end, for now.
The regulations were challenged by Daniel J. Bernstein, a professor of mathematics, statistics, and computer science at the University of Illinois at Chicago. Bernstein filed his lawsuit in February 1995 and won four court decisions against the constitutionality of the government's previous regulations.
In an October 2002 court hearing on the current encryption regulations, Department of Justice attorney Tony Coppolino told the court that the government would not enforce several portions of the regulations.
``I can assure you that the regulatory authority does not want [researchers who are collaborating at conferences] sending us an e-mail every time they change something in an algorithm,'' Coppolino told the court. Coppolino also said that commmercial book publishers and assembly-language publishers did not need to obtain licenses.
As observers predicted after the hearing, Chief Judge Marilyn Hall Patel of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California relied on the government's promises and dismissed Bernstein's case without deciding the constitutionality of the current regulations.
``If and when there is a concrete threat of enforcement against Bernstein for a specific activity, Bernstein may return for judicial resolution of that dispute,'' Patel wrote, after citing Coppolino's ``repeated assurances that Bernstein is not prohibited from engaging in his activities.''
``I hope the government sticks to its promises and leaves me alone,'' Bernstein said in a statement today acknowledging Patel's decision. ``But if they change their mind and start harassing Internet-security researchers, I'll be back.''
Hit them with a DOS. Write up a simple program to keep requesting the SiteFinder "service" every second, and leave it on overnight. It's your patriotic duty!
Because everybody else HAS to pay 7-35 dollars for the privilege of cybersquatting. Vericrud doesn't pay anything.
their own independent examination
How can it be independent if THEY DID IT?
Seriously though, what type of hardware/software is Verisign running to support such a massive "service"? Can we hit it with a DDOS?
In Soviet Russia, the lion shares YOU!
(and everyplace else lions dwell, I guess..)
Sorry, got a 500 Server error when posting that, and didn't Plain Text it.
ClearSpeed Announces CS301 Multi-Threaded Array Processor to Deliver High Performance Computing and Power Efficiency
October 14th, 2003
Highest Floating Point Performance Chip Executes Complex Mathematical Applications in a Fraction of the Power and Time.
SAN JOSE, Calif., October 14th, 2003 -- ClearSpeed Technology, a leading provider of high performance, low power chip-based solutions, today announced the ClearSpeed CS301, a multi-threaded array processor that enables dramatic improvements in performance and power consumption for intensive floating point applications. At over 25 GFLOPS peak performance, the new chip provides more than twice the processing speed of competitive products. At 10 GFLOPS per Watt, power consumption is also twenty times more efficient. As a result, the CS301 delivers up to a ninety percent reduction in purchase price and running costs, making high performance computing affordable and available to companies of all sizes.
"With conventional processor design, increasing performance has tended to come with real penalties in power consumption and heat dissipation, to the point where computing cannot keep up with the demands of today's emerging applications and rapidly increasing volumes of data," said Tom Beese, CEO of ClearSpeed Technology. "The CS301 is designed specifically to meet those needs with high performance, power efficiency and full programmability in C
combined into a single chip. The CS301 is the first in a family of ClearSpeed microprocessors that we believe will challenge present day thinking by creating a world where scientists, bio-informaticians, engineers and content creators alike can have access to high performance computing anywhere, anytime."
The CS301 is based on a multi-threaded array processing (MTAP) architecture and includes 64 processing elements, 384 Kbytes of on-chip SRAM and I/O ports interconnecting through ClearSpeed's ClearConnect(R) bus. Each processing element has its own floating point units, local memory and I/O capability, making the CS301 ideally suited for applications which have high processing or bandwidth requirements. The ClearConnect bus is a packet switched network that provides high bandwidth and low power consumption, supporting multiple concurrent transfers giving even higher aggregate bandwidth.
As a result, complex mathematically based applications such as, computational biology and drug discovery, digital content creation, nanotechnology development, scientific research and financial modelling can now be executed in a fraction of the time.
"We are gratified to see the immediate high level of interest displayed by OEM's in the overall system improvements enabled by the CS301," said Mike Calise, president of ClearSpeed U.S. "The dual benefit of performance and efficiency is empowering companies to accelerate existing applications as well as inspiring them to explore new applications that were previously inaccessible."
The CS301 can serve either as a co-processor alongside an Intel or AMD CPU within a high performance workstation, blade server or cluster configuration, or as a standalone processor for embedded DSP applications like radar pulse compression or image processing. In applications where the CS301 is acting as a co-processor, dynamic libraries offload an application's inner loops to the CS301. Although these inner loops only make up a small portion of the source code, these loops are responsible for the vast majority of the application's running time. By offloading the inner loops, the CS301 can bypass the traditional bottleneck caused by a CPU's limited mathematical capability, executing the core of the application more than twice as fast as anything else in the marketplace.
"To deliver such high levels of performance with full programmability and outstanding gains in power efficiency is a very significant achievement," said Chris Piercy, president and chairman of the Northern Californ
ClearSpeed Announces CS301 Multi-Threaded Array Processor to Deliver High Performance Computing and Power Efficiency October 14th, 2003 Highest Floating Point Performance Chip Executes Complex Mathematical Applications in a Fraction of the Power and Time. SAN JOSE, Calif., October 14th, 2003 -- ClearSpeed Technology, a leading provider of high performance, low power chip-based solutions, today announced the ClearSpeed CS301, a multi-threaded array processor that enables dramatic improvements in performance and power consumption for intensive floating point applications. At over 25 GFLOPS peak performance, the new chip provides more than twice the processing speed of competitive products. At 10 GFLOPS per Watt, power consumption is also twenty times more efficient. As a result, the CS301 delivers up to a ninety percent reduction in purchase price and running costs, making high performance computing affordable and available to companies of all sizes. "With conventional processor design, increasing performance has tended to come with real penalties in power consumption and heat dissipation, to the point where computing cannot keep up with the demands of today's emerging applications and rapidly increasing volumes of data," said Tom Beese, CEO of ClearSpeed Technology. "The CS301 is designed specifically to meet those needs with high performance, power efficiency and full programmability in C combined into a single chip. The CS301 is the first in a family of ClearSpeed microprocessors that we believe will challenge present day thinking by creating a world where scientists, bio-informaticians, engineers and content creators alike can have access to high performance computing anywhere, anytime." The CS301 is based on a multi-threaded array processing (MTAP) architecture and includes 64 processing elements, 384 Kbytes of on-chip SRAM and I/O ports interconnecting through ClearSpeed's ClearConnect(R) bus. Each processing element has its own floating point units, local memory and I/O capability, making the CS301 ideally suited for applications which have high processing or bandwidth requirements. The ClearConnect bus is a packet switched network that provides high bandwidth and low power consumption, supporting multiple concurrent transfers giving even higher aggregate bandwidth. As a result, complex mathematically based applications such as, computational biology and drug discovery, digital content creation, nanotechnology development, scientific research and financial modelling can now be executed in a fraction of the time. "We are gratified to see the immediate high level of interest displayed by OEM's in the overall system improvements enabled by the CS301," said Mike Calise, president of ClearSpeed U.S. "The dual benefit of performance and efficiency is empowering companies to accelerate existing applications as well as inspiring them to explore new applications that were previously inaccessible." The CS301 can serve either as a co-processor alongside an Intel or AMD CPU within a high performance workstation, blade server or cluster configuration, or as a standalone processor for embedded DSP applications like radar pulse compression or image processing. In applications where the CS301 is acting as a co-processor, dynamic libraries offload an application's inner loops to the CS301. Although these inner loops only make up a small portion of the source code, these loops are responsible for the vast majority of the application's running time. By offloading the inner loops, the CS301 can bypass the traditional bottleneck caused by a CPU's limited mathematical capability, executing the core of the application more than twice as fast as anything else in the marketplace. "To deliver such high levels of performance with full programmability and outstanding gains in power efficiency is a very significant achievement," said Chris Piercy, president and chairman of the Northern California Nanotechnology Initiative. "We believe this technology will accelerate the development of nanotechnology and its applications across various
Easy. We can allow everybody to view all messages, but randomly pick 1 out of 20 people and require that person to rate the article. Obviously we can't do the picking on the client side, we'd have to figure out a way to do it server side
Who wants to bet that AOL will be cannabalizing it's own user base with the launch of this Netscape online? Think about it. Most AOLers just want a simple way to get online, and don't like the $23.95 AOL cost, so a lot of them will just switch to the netscape online service.
What they have to do is create a /. type system. For example, everyone would be able to rate the quality of the information, so information that is of high value is "modded up", and the poor information, the insulting/wrong info is modded down. Unless they install a rating system, the entire project is going to all the nutcases who believe all sorts of trashy things.
Or what about Freenet? Barring the troubles it's had recently, it might be useful. And couldn't the MIT researchers be sued anyway for just starting this program? The RIAA sued Sharman Networks, even though they don't have control over what Kazaa distributes.
Why do you have to switch to Windows to "stay legal"? Can't you just keep on using the SCO box without vendor support?
Wow, $50 an hour? Where do I sign up? I can train moronic - er, technologically-challenged bosses....
Anyone having trouble accessing the website?
All I get is:
Problem in Database Connection
This Website is powered by PostNuke
Although this site is running the PostNuke software
it has no other connection to the PostNuke Developers.
Please refrain from sending messages about this site or its content
to the PostNuke team, the end will result in an ignored e-mail.
Here's the email I responded to roland with:
This email is in response to the cease and desist letter received by Colin and Vlad. I am responding because Colin and Vlad are minors. Me, Mr. Dean Beeler, am the only individual of majority age subject of this communcation.
Jun, I am very disappointed with you. I contacted Roland first to prevent such legal harrassment. Roland did not even seem to care about my work until I brought to attention the fact that Roland had lost the copyright on the said material in question. Your lawyer cites 17 U.S.C. section 102(a). "original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression." As stated in a previous conversation, this law only applies to works fixed after 1989. The MT-32 ROM was fixed in 1987. I refer your attorney to 17 U.S.C. section 405 regarding audio fixed before 1989. Since Roland failed to satisfy any of the three requirements in 405(a), Roland lost the copyright on the said samples. Jun, you argued that there are duplicate samples between the SC-55 and the MT-32. This is not literally true. Only a single audio sample matches between the SC-55 and the MT-32, and even this sample is not an identical copy due to format differences. Finally, I will bring Roland's attention to the fact that they filed the copyright on the SC-55 samples with no claim to the underlying work. As such, since the copies are not exact, and no claim is made on the actual sound a "tibale" makes (since it occurs naturally is hence something uncopyrightable), there is nothing in common between the MT-32 and SC-55.
Shame on you. As lawyers, you should know that the burden of proof regarding copyright lies with the individual claiming the copyright. Regarding damages, since I first contacted Roland demanding proof of copyright (which Roland failed to provide) our case would fall under one of innocent infringement. As such, any damanges Roland could claim would be nil. Since no money is being made regarding any use of the samples, no punitive damages what-so-ever can be claimed. Finally, since the MT-32 samples are no longer being licensed in marketable hardware, Roland will also have a difficult time proving they have lost income due to any proven copyright infringement. Again, I ask for proof that Roland satisfied any of the terms specified in 17 U.S.C. section 405. If Roland has not, than any case brought against us would be frivilous and would be subject to countersuit.
No offending material is presently on the site. The ROM is not available anywhere and can only be made available by making a copy using the description provided. The DMCA does not apply in this instance because no Digital Rights Management (DRM) hardware is built into the MT-32 or the ROM. The DMCA only applies when copy protection measures are circumvented to make copies. Copyright law does grant an individual one additional copy for archival purposes. As such, the simple act of copying the ROM does not constitute a violation.
With regard to the claim that reverse engineering has been done: No reverse engineering has been done. No DRM encoding or encryption is used in the ROM. The only conversion that needed to be done was converting the file from decibel measurements to PCM measurements. This is not copy protection. The ROM is stored this way because decibel measurements are a more efficent means of storage for the MT-32's design. It just so happens that PCM is now the most effective means of storage on modern machines. If this is illegal, then RF modulator use is illegal when used to convert the output of a DVD player's composite signal to coax in order that a person can watch DVD's on an older TV. No decryption is done, just conversion from one generation of technology to the other.
No, the ROM is not available and has never been made availble on the site. On clicking the link that reads, "Original ROM", a window pops up that reads, "On request only." This is to verify that the individual indeed owns their own MT-32, there by making copy ownership legal (and to hopeful
No, you should come up with a solution, patent it, license it for free with the proviso that you're not a spammer, then when spammers have to get the technology (and the license that goes along with it) and continue to spam anyway, you hit them with DMCA and: PROFIT!!!
The link provided is to UPGRADE your account, not delete it. Someone get a real deletion link.
Just a quick question: if you find a script kiddie who's been DOSing your site (let's say he's 12) can you sue him for damages? Would the parents get blamed and have to pay for damages?
Here's a link: Link. I'm refreshing as fast as possible....
I don't know what you're complaining about, but this is a Good Thing(TM). If we can connect spam with lots of other illegal/immoral behavior, like the RIAA is connecting P2P with child porn, we can get public support on our side and get an anti-spam federal law into place.