I think it was modded "informative" as a joke. As in "now we stand informed that you're looking at gay porno". This deliberate misuse of the moderation system will likely get caught in meta-moderation.
Last I checked the post stood at -1 (30% Informative, 70% Troll), which sounds about right.
As a few people have by now pointed out, I was totally wrong with my last post (grandparent to this one). 1 million is indeed the US standard for platinum. I got my columns mixed up when I scrolled down the wikipedia article.
The best example I can come up with is ICO for the PS2. Basically a "save the girl" adventure title with a lot of puzzle solving aspects. The rumble feature came into play whenever you'd grab the girl's hand to lead her around. They'd put a single pulse through the controller every second or so, as if you could feel her heartbeat. Psychologically, it was more effective at making me care about her than any other character in any other game I can think of.
No, people does not know what DRM means, but what they do know is that they cant copy their music freely from their iPod as they could with the tape recorder.
FYI, with the new iTunes 7, people who buy their music from the iTunes music store can now do "reverse syncs" to move music from their iPod to a computer.
They still can't move music in other formats off their iPods, but the noose of DRM has loosened slightly.
Like a virus, it turns the users own system against the user.
It is a viral infection of the worst sort. It deserves to be described as such.
Grandparent post was requesting that we choose our words carefully and accurately so as not to mislead or misinform because the terms referred to have very specific definitions when used in the context of computers. Grandparent was not suggesting DRM isn't lame or that it's always accurately represented.
Let's review.
A "trojan" is a program that appears to do one thing, but actually does another. DRM in general does not meet this standard. You seem to imply that you're aware of a specific case where DRM misrepresents itself to the user, but you make no reference to this case, nor does the original Zune topic refer to such a case.
The term "virus" refers to a piece of code that silently reproduces itself. It does not refer to software that is simply harmful to the user (that's "malware"). I am unaware of any case DRM propagates by adding itself to files silently or without the users knowledge, so I don't believe it's really an appropriate use of the term. If you're aware of such a case, speak up. And although the Zune does add DRM to files shared wirelessly with other Zune players, this DRM is limited and does not propagate to other files.
"Infection" typically refers to a normal file that has unrelated (and often malicious) code added to it, typically without the user's knowledge. If you are aware of a case where DRM is added to a file without the users knowledge, that would certainly be a case of "infection" and a valid use of the term.
Feel free to look up "virus" and "trojan" at http://dictionary.reference.com/ and scroll down the the definitions supplied by the Free On-line Dictionary of Computing for more complete definitions. See also "worm".
Maybe I'm doing something wrong. Its also a pain in the arse to have to re-learn everything, for example I still can't figure out how to get an equation to pretty print to a jpg on a mac.
To capture an equation as an image (or capture anything else on your screen as an image for that matter), here are a couple quick shortcuts. One way is to press "Cmnd+Shift+3". This will take a screen shot in.png format and place it on the desktop. Another way is to press "Cmnd+Shift+4". This will give you cursor crosshairs which you can use to drag a selection box for capturing a specific portion of the screen. This will also result in a.png placed on your desktop. If you really need your images in.jpg, you can open the.png files in Preview and then select Save As... and resave them as.jpgs.
Hopefully that will serve for your purposes. MacOS has a huge amount of non-obvious functionality. You can learn more by going into the Help Viewer and searching on Keyboard Shortcuts. Scroll down in the results until you get to the Support Articles and read "Mac OS X keyboard shortcuts". Very useful list for any Mac user.
From the originally cited article: The security cameras record sound and audio directly to a videocassette recorder inside the house, and the Gannons posted warnings about the system, Janet Gannon said.
Once warnings have been posed that the system exists, one cannot expect not to be recorded.
Quoting from the New Hampshire Wiretapping and Eavedropping law, under Definitions:
II. "Oral communication'' means any oral communication uttered by a person exhibiting an expectation that such communication is not subject to interception under circumstances justifying such expectation.
Sounds like NH law clearly exempts situations in which the recorded party is aware that they are being recorded. People can read up on the law for themselves if they like:
The parent's provided link has some really informative information about the subject at hand, someone with mod points please mod him up. As a supplemental I'll provide a link to the history of the polygraph.
I think the people worried about the potential for errors and misuse of the fMRI are missing the point. Any tool ever invented can be and probably has been misused. Using fMRI for lie-detection is unlikely to be an exception. Nor should we naively expect it to be 100% accurate. But it does show promise to be more accurate than its predecessor in lie-detection technology, the polygraph, which is still in use. In that respect shouldn't we absolutely be trying it out and hoping to replace an old technology with a more effective one?
I suppose one might have the legitimate concern that it would be abused in an Orwellian way because it could be more accurate. The idea of fascist states potentially using it to crush dissent, or misusing it in some other horrible way, is scary. But if that's the ACLU's concern, let's get that debate out in the open instead of using the "this device is should not use used until it's accuracy has been proven" argument (especially in light of the fact that exisiting lie-detection technology has been proven inaccurate).
To whit, the original PS1 did not have analog control.
That's a great example of a company switching controllers designs during a product's life-cycle. But as you say yourself, the Revolution controller should be a bit different. I don't think we can underestimate this. On the PS1, how many developers made games that could only be played if you had those analog controls? As I recall, while many games quickly adopted analog functionality, most could also still be played using the D-pad (even if you didn't have the same level of control). So even consumers who didn't upgrade to the new controller could still buy and enjoy the new games. But the new Nintendo controller is different enough that I don't know if you'd be able to say the same thing if you designed a game's control scheme around its functionality.
Still, you make a good point. It's not impossible.
Microsoft has already released the 360, so it's too late for them to make a copy of the Revolution controller as a standard part of their system.
As for Sony, while they have some time before release, they've already announced their system and devs are already developing for it. So it's probably too late for them to copy it too.
If it's a huge success, sure, Sony and Microsoft could each release a stand-alone controller, but anything that isn't sold standard with a system won't receive the same level of 3rd party attention because they can't rely on it being present on all systems, and nobody wants to make games for a fraction of the marketplace. Which doesn't mean that market would be totally closed to them, but it would likely make them feel like they're marketing digital music players against the iPod.
If you are have a team developing a program for two different platforms and another team developing a similar application program for just one - which will take less time to develop all their aspects being equal?
I'm not trying to claim that it's not harder to develop for two platforms than one, obviously you're correct about that. In your example the team developing for one platform will be faster, all things being equal, as you say. Except that all things are not equal. What I'm trying to say is the additional cost of the additional effort involved with developing for Windows is going to be easily offset by the revenue generated by a significantly larger and less competitive market. Adobe can afford a larger team and still have a profitable product, so I suspect in the final equation having a Windows version will result faster development, not slower.
However Aperture at this point has a serious lead out of the gate, that combined with the Lightroom team also having to try and support a Windows build eventually may let Apple not only keep but increase the lead.
You say this like having a Windows version is some sort of handicap. It's not. Remember while Apple has made some recent gains in the computer market, Windows still far and away owns the lion's share. Aperture was briefly a reason for certain people to "switch", but soon this segment will be able to stay with their PCs and get a similar experience. And with no Aperture for Windows, Lightroom will have no competition for a great segment of the market (apologies to any 3rd party digital photo editing application that I may have ignorantly factored out of the equation).
Even if Aperture stays slightly better on the Mac, who cares? Windows version = moneymoneymoney.
You say that we cheapen the notion of art when we promote a narrowly construed definition, but is it not an overly broad definition of art that really cheapens the term? If we're quick to ascribe the term "art" to all video games, who will then care if we point to any particular game and say "that, like all the others, is also art"?
It's like someone pointed to the Mona Lisa and said "What a work of art!" and you retorted "Man, it really irks me when someone singles out that kind of painting as the only sort which the term 'art of painting' can be legitimately applied. Are not [insert mass produced prints] also art?" Sure, you'd be technically correct in a 'what is art?' sense, but really, who cares?
The whole point is that Shadow is a game of exceptional presentation and uncommon visual splendor (especially by PS2 standards). If it's fair to call any PS2 game a work of art, it's Shadow.
Each youth could set up a system, and then they would go head-to-head to crack the other youth's system.
A great idea, but I doubt it'll ever catch on. There's little glory in declaring that you've cracked some other kid's system that nobody's ever heard of. But when you can point to a major corporate player that spends hundreds of thousands of dollars on computer securtiy and announce you've cracked their system, that's some bragging rights.
[Justice Sandra Day O'Connor] was joined in her [dissenting] opinion by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, as well as Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.
It's not often that I find myself agreeing with the opinions of Scalia, but the ruling of the majority seems to clearly fly in the face of our constitution.
To quote an excerpt from our fifth amendment, as taken from wikisource.org: No person shall be [...] deprived of [...] property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
The key point being that eminent domain is only supposed to be invoked when the land is needed for public use, which it is clearly not in this case, or when by due process of law, which is not satisfied by saying "local government knows best". Taking the land for private use and then arguing that this act indirectly benefits the public sounds to me like a clear run around the protections our founding fathers intended to bestow.
Those 4GB Everios mentioned in the parent post use Microdrives, which are little miniature hard drive platters small enough to fit in a CompactFlash form factor.
For those that like the sound of this line of cameras but would like to see more storage capacity, JVC has apparently announced they're going to start making Everios using 20GB and 30GB hard drives. This new line will supposedly support Mac editing in iMovie for those who want that sort of thing (older models did not offer this). I've attached a the link to the JVC press release for those who want to read up about it.
Disclaimer: Please note that I do not own an Everio, nor any other camcorder, so I am not in a position to make any authorative recommendations or comparisons, let alone attest to their durability. My opinions are void where prohibited.
Did you open up the box? If not, for all you know it COULD have been a dual-core hyper-threaded P4EE, which makes for 4 virtual processors.
For all I know it could have been running on a bowl of Grape Nuts, but I just don't find this idea credible. The original claim being disputed is that Steve was running a machine with four Pentium processors, a claim that is both extremely unlikely and which has absolutely no supporting evidence (and no, a link to another article making the claim is not itself evidence). Are we going to start counting potential virutal processors in an attempt to support this shakey claim?
To further explore the notion hypthetically, since we know that the Intel-based Macs that are being made available to developers are single-CPU machines, what would be the gain in kitbashing together a special machine for Steve's demo? To make performance look better on Intel than it really is? Do you think developers with access to the single processor machines would be both capable and interested in keeping this secret for Steve?
If you belive that all that is plausible, you might as well not believe in the moon landing. The thrust of Space cowboy's post is surely correct. It is further supported by nuggetman's pic of the machine's "About this Mac" box, which makes no mention of additional processors. Unless, of course, you believe they faked that too. But for those of us who are such a total conspiracy fruits that they believe Steve had the contents of that About Box falsified, you might as well believe it was secretly a PPC-based machine.
To expound further upon one point, namely why Apple likely gave developers a full year's advance warning, everyone should remember that the sooner developers get their applications compiled as Intel-friendly universal binaries the better. If Apple had waited until the last minute to inform developers of the change, it would force developers to rerelease their software at the last minute (and many would fail to due so). By giving developers a year lead time, deveopers can release their applications in universal binaries today and still have the same applications run on the machines of tomorrow.
I don't find the prices to be that out of line. For example, while the soundtrack to FF X is priced at a whopping $24.99 for the album, you'll notice that the album contains 89 tracks. And while a few of those tracks are a bit short in duration, at what amounts to approximately 28 cents each, I think that the price is reasonable.
True, Apple has made no announcement, but that's typical of them. Wouldn't it be stupid for Apple to say "Hey everybody, we have an exploitable problem right here and we don't have a fix for it yet!" Better to fix it quietly and quickly, no?
I absolutely agree and I wish more people would discuss this idea, mainly in the hopes of catching Apple's ear. As it stands the current debate appears populated by three main schools of thought:
The pro-Apple DRM majority: "Hey, Apple's golden, fur-lined handcuffs are quite comfortable, very stylish, and hurt much less that competitor's sandpaper and spike encrusted handcuffs, so please leave them alone. If you break them you'll just be ruining things for the rest of us!"
The ownership-first minority: "Hey, I don't mind paying for my music, but once it's paid for it's MINE and I expect to be able to do whatever I want with it. And I have legitimate uses that the DRM prevents, including playing my music on my Linux box loud enough to wake Beethovan. And I represent the majority, you callous jerk!"
The anti-establishment handful: "1 h473 DRM/Apple/the recording industry/anyone who disagrees with me, they suX0rs. They're just getting what they deserve! Anarchy r001z! Also, in school my strong point was spellling."
I don't see these camps changing much. But regardless of where you stand in the debate, hopefully we can all agree that if DVD Jon's work can be credibly considered any sort of valid threat to Apple's relationship with the recording industry, then you first have to accept that there is valid customer demand for paid-for music on the Linux platform. So instead of worrying about the money lost by anti-DRMed files being shared or music labels not renewing contracts, wouldn't it make more sense for Apple to make iTunes and the iPod work with Linux and actually make a little money selling more music on the side?
Slashdot Mirror
I think it was modded "informative" as a joke. As in "now we stand informed that you're looking at gay porno". This deliberate misuse of the moderation system will likely get caught in meta-moderation.
Last I checked the post stood at -1 (30% Informative, 70% Troll), which sounds about right.
I didn't RTFA, but WTF? FYI IANAL, but AFAIK this is slander, AKA lies. I'd sue FTW ASAP. J/K, LOL.
Throwing my own hat into the "wish list" thread, I'd really love to see Load Runner. Please, god.
Thanks to everyone who caught my error!
Actually, in the US the 1 million mark is referred to as "gold". It takes sales of 10 million to go platinum.
These thresholds vary from country to country.
See the wikipedia article for more detail if you like: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_album
The best example I can come up with is ICO for the PS2. Basically a "save the girl" adventure title with a lot of puzzle solving aspects. The rumble feature came into play whenever you'd grab the girl's hand to lead her around. They'd put a single pulse through the controller every second or so, as if you could feel her heartbeat. Psychologically, it was more effective at making me care about her than any other character in any other game I can think of.
Grandparent is referencing two sorts of fallacious arguments. See http://www.geekpress.com/2006/09/excellent-list-of -logical-fallaciesad.html for an entertaining list of fallacies and associated examples.
FYI, with the new iTunes 7, people who buy their music from the iTunes music store can now do "reverse syncs" to move music from their iPod to a computer.
They still can't move music in other formats off their iPods, but the noose of DRM has loosened slightly.
http://www.apple.com/itunes/sync/transfer.html
It is a viral infection of the worst sort. It deserves to be described as such.
Grandparent post was requesting that we choose our words carefully and accurately so as not to mislead or misinform because the terms referred to have very specific definitions when used in the context of computers. Grandparent was not suggesting DRM isn't lame or that it's always accurately represented.
Let's review.
A "trojan" is a program that appears to do one thing, but actually does another. DRM in general does not meet this standard. You seem to imply that you're aware of a specific case where DRM misrepresents itself to the user, but you make no reference to this case, nor does the original Zune topic refer to such a case.
The term "virus" refers to a piece of code that silently reproduces itself. It does not refer to software that is simply harmful to the user (that's "malware"). I am unaware of any case DRM propagates by adding itself to files silently or without the users knowledge, so I don't believe it's really an appropriate use of the term. If you're aware of such a case, speak up. And although the Zune does add DRM to files shared wirelessly with other Zune players, this DRM is limited and does not propagate to other files.
"Infection" typically refers to a normal file that has unrelated (and often malicious) code added to it, typically without the user's knowledge. If you are aware of a case where DRM is added to a file without the users knowledge, that would certainly be a case of "infection" and a valid use of the term.
Feel free to look up "virus" and "trojan" at http://dictionary.reference.com/ and scroll down the the definitions supplied by the Free On-line Dictionary of Computing for more complete definitions. See also "worm".
To capture an equation as an image (or capture anything else on your screen as an image for that matter), here are a couple quick shortcuts. One way is to press "Cmnd+Shift+3". This will take a screen shot in .png format and place it on the desktop. Another way is to press "Cmnd+Shift+4". This will give you cursor crosshairs which you can use to drag a selection box for capturing a specific portion of the screen. This will also result in a .png placed on your desktop. If you really need your images in .jpg, you can open the .png files in Preview and then select Save As... and resave them as .jpgs.
Hopefully that will serve for your purposes. MacOS has a huge amount of non-obvious functionality. You can learn more by going into the Help Viewer and searching on Keyboard Shortcuts. Scroll down in the results until you get to the Support Articles and read "Mac OS X keyboard shortcuts". Very useful list for any Mac user.
Once warnings have been posed that the system exists, one cannot expect not to be recorded.
Quoting from the New Hampshire Wiretapping and Eavedropping law, under Definitions:
II. "Oral communication'' means any oral communication uttered by a person exhibiting an expectation that such communication is not subject to interception under circumstances justifying such expectation.
Sounds like NH law clearly exempts situations in which the recorded party is aware that they are being recorded. People can read up on the law for themselves if they like:
http://nhdcyf.info/rsa/570-a.html
Sounds like the Gannons are on pretty solid legal ground.
http://www.crimelibrary.com/forensics/polygraph/
I think the people worried about the potential for errors and misuse of the fMRI are missing the point. Any tool ever invented can be and probably has been misused. Using fMRI for lie-detection is unlikely to be an exception. Nor should we naively expect it to be 100% accurate. But it does show promise to be more accurate than its predecessor in lie-detection technology, the polygraph, which is still in use. In that respect shouldn't we absolutely be trying it out and hoping to replace an old technology with a more effective one?
I suppose one might have the legitimate concern that it would be abused in an Orwellian way because it could be more accurate. The idea of fascist states potentially using it to crush dissent, or misusing it in some other horrible way, is scary. But if that's the ACLU's concern, let's get that debate out in the open instead of using the "this device is should not use used until it's accuracy has been proven" argument (especially in light of the fact that exisiting lie-detection technology has been proven inaccurate).
That's a great example of a company switching controllers designs during a product's life-cycle. But as you say yourself, the Revolution controller should be a bit different. I don't think we can underestimate this. On the PS1, how many developers made games that could only be played if you had those analog controls? As I recall, while many games quickly adopted analog functionality, most could also still be played using the D-pad (even if you didn't have the same level of control). So even consumers who didn't upgrade to the new controller could still buy and enjoy the new games. But the new Nintendo controller is different enough that I don't know if you'd be able to say the same thing if you designed a game's control scheme around its functionality.
Still, you make a good point. It's not impossible.
As for Sony, while they have some time before release, they've already announced their system and devs are already developing for it. So it's probably too late for them to copy it too.
If it's a huge success, sure, Sony and Microsoft could each release a stand-alone controller, but anything that isn't sold standard with a system won't receive the same level of 3rd party attention because they can't rely on it being present on all systems, and nobody wants to make games for a fraction of the marketplace. Which doesn't mean that market would be totally closed to them, but it would likely make them feel like they're marketing digital music players against the iPod.
I'm not trying to claim that it's not harder to develop for two platforms than one, obviously you're correct about that. In your example the team developing for one platform will be faster, all things being equal, as you say. Except that all things are not equal. What I'm trying to say is the additional cost of the additional effort involved with developing for Windows is going to be easily offset by the revenue generated by a significantly larger and less competitive market. Adobe can afford a larger team and still have a profitable product, so I suspect in the final equation having a Windows version will result faster development, not slower.
You say this like having a Windows version is some sort of handicap. It's not. Remember while Apple has made some recent gains in the computer market, Windows still far and away owns the lion's share. Aperture was briefly a reason for certain people to "switch", but soon this segment will be able to stay with their PCs and get a similar experience. And with no Aperture for Windows, Lightroom will have no competition for a great segment of the market (apologies to any 3rd party digital photo editing application that I may have ignorantly factored out of the equation).
Even if Aperture stays slightly better on the Mac, who cares? Windows version = moneymoneymoney.
It's like someone pointed to the Mona Lisa and said "What a work of art!" and you retorted "Man, it really irks me when someone singles out that kind of painting as the only sort which the term 'art of painting' can be legitimately applied. Are not [insert mass produced prints] also art?" Sure, you'd be technically correct in a 'what is art?' sense, but really, who cares?
The whole point is that Shadow is a game of exceptional presentation and uncommon visual splendor (especially by PS2 standards). If it's fair to call any PS2 game a work of art, it's Shadow.
A great idea, but I doubt it'll ever catch on. There's little glory in declaring that you've cracked some other kid's system that nobody's ever heard of. But when you can point to a major corporate player that spends hundreds of thousands of dollars on computer securtiy and announce you've cracked their system, that's some bragging rights.
It's not often that I find myself agreeing with the opinions of Scalia, but the ruling of the majority seems to clearly fly in the face of our constitution.
To quote an excerpt from our fifth amendment, as taken from wikisource.org:
No person shall be [...] deprived of [...] property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
The key point being that eminent domain is only supposed to be invoked when the land is needed for public use, which it is clearly not in this case, or when by due process of law, which is not satisfied by saying "local government knows best". Taking the land for private use and then arguing that this act indirectly benefits the public sounds to me like a clear run around the protections our founding fathers intended to bestow.
For those that like the sound of this line of cameras but would like to see more storage capacity, JVC has apparently announced they're going to start making Everios using 20GB and 30GB hard drives. This new line will supposedly support Mac editing in iMovie for those who want that sort of thing (older models did not offer this). I've attached a the link to the JVC press release for those who want to read up about it.
Reference URL:D =1
http://www.jvc.com/press/index.jsp?item=461&pageI
Disclaimer: Please note that I do not own an Everio, nor any other camcorder, so I am not in a position to make any authorative recommendations or comparisons, let alone attest to their durability. My opinions are void where prohibited.
For all I know it could have been running on a bowl of Grape Nuts, but I just don't find this idea credible. The original claim being disputed is that Steve was running a machine with four Pentium processors, a claim that is both extremely unlikely and which has absolutely no supporting evidence (and no, a link to another article making the claim is not itself evidence). Are we going to start counting potential virutal processors in an attempt to support this shakey claim?
To further explore the notion hypthetically, since we know that the Intel-based Macs that are being made available to developers are single-CPU machines, what would be the gain in kitbashing together a special machine for Steve's demo? To make performance look better on Intel than it really is? Do you think developers with access to the single processor machines would be both capable and interested in keeping this secret for Steve?
If you belive that all that is plausible, you might as well not believe in the moon landing. The thrust of Space cowboy's post is surely correct. It is further supported by nuggetman's pic of the machine's "About this Mac" box, which makes no mention of additional processors. Unless, of course, you believe they faked that too. But for those of us who are such a total conspiracy fruits that they believe Steve had the contents of that About Box falsified, you might as well believe it was secretly a PPC-based machine.
To expound further upon one point, namely why Apple likely gave developers a full year's advance warning, everyone should remember that the sooner developers get their applications compiled as Intel-friendly universal binaries the better. If Apple had waited until the last minute to inform developers of the change, it would force developers to rerelease their software at the last minute (and many would fail to due so). By giving developers a year lead time, deveopers can release their applications in universal binaries today and still have the same applications run on the machines of tomorrow.
I don't find the prices to be that out of line. For example, while the soundtrack to FF X is priced at a whopping $24.99 for the album, you'll notice that the album contains 89 tracks. And while a few of those tracks are a bit short in duration, at what amounts to approximately 28 cents each, I think that the price is reasonable.
True, Apple has made no announcement, but that's typical of them. Wouldn't it be stupid for Apple to say "Hey everybody, we have an exploitable problem right here and we don't have a fix for it yet!" Better to fix it quietly and quickly, no?
The pro-Apple DRM majority: "Hey, Apple's golden, fur-lined handcuffs are quite comfortable, very stylish, and hurt much less that competitor's sandpaper and spike encrusted handcuffs, so please leave them alone. If you break them you'll just be ruining things for the rest of us!"
The ownership-first minority: "Hey, I don't mind paying for my music, but once it's paid for it's MINE and I expect to be able to do whatever I want with it. And I have legitimate uses that the DRM prevents, including playing my music on my Linux box loud enough to wake Beethovan. And I represent the majority, you callous jerk!"
The anti-establishment handful: "1 h473 DRM/Apple/the recording industry/anyone who disagrees with me, they suX0rs. They're just getting what they deserve! Anarchy r001z! Also, in school my strong point was spellling."
I don't see these camps changing much. But regardless of where you stand in the debate, hopefully we can all agree that if DVD Jon's work can be credibly considered any sort of valid threat to Apple's relationship with the recording industry, then you first have to accept that there is valid customer demand for paid-for music on the Linux platform. So instead of worrying about the money lost by anti-DRMed files being shared or music labels not renewing contracts, wouldn't it make more sense for Apple to make iTunes and the iPod work with Linux and actually make a little money selling more music on the side?
Just my 2 cents.