In a world where companies are being pressured to reduce the standby power consumption of devices, when electricity prices are rising, while "wall warts" are wasting a significant amount of power... are we sure this is a good time to trade efficiency for convenience?
You misunderstand. The regulation is what established the monopoly in the first place. The municipalities made laws stating that there can only be one cable provider. So it does not make sense to sue the cable provider for being the only one.
The solution is to change the government regulation. There needs to be only one provider of cable wires, but multiple providers of cable service. Just like with power: there are many power companies providing power in a given area, but only one company who maintains the lines. I should be able to use AOL, or Toad Net, or Joe's ISP over my cable lines.
If you remember, a decade ago, this is how things were. There were these really old lines that used to be used for analog telephones -- remember those? Back before cell phones? And every ISP had a "phone number" that you could "dial" to connect to them. It was slow, but the system was using the right model. We need to get back to that.
This is within the jurisdiction of the DOJ and the FTC, not the FCC.
People seem to assume that if something involves communications, that every aspect of it must be patrolled by the FCC. They also seem to assume the reverse is also true: That if the FCC has no comment, then no one else has jurisdiction and it is okay. Both assumptions are false.
The FTC should also be looking into cell phone tying. I'm unclear why the FCC is involved. Tying of cell phone providers does not interfere with anyone's radio frequencies.
Law #1: You are permitted to make backups of DVDs. Law #2: You are not permitted to make or possess software that makes backups of DVDs.
This trial is against RealMedia, who is making software that makes backups of DVDs. RealMedia is not trying to actually make backups of DVDs. Hence, law #1 is irrelevant.
Now, if someone had such software, then still unambiguous that you are in violation of law #2. Does that make law #1 pointless? Yes, but there is still no ambiguity. If you could find a way to make backups without possessing software that makes backups -- then yes, you would be able to excercise your right.
That type of battery excels at long life, but has poor storage capacity. Today, we use NiMH and Li-Ion which are chosen for capacity, but have poor reliability.
Where does this myth that the batteries are fundamentally going to have to be replaced come from?
It comes from experience: as you say, laptop batteries die after a few years. It is also made worse by exaggerated claims from the manufacturers. Apple claims their new battery gets 8 hours, yet no reviewer has ever gotten that. A friend of mine has one, and he said he gets 3-4 hours.
And *even if they do have to be replaced*, you're talking about battery prices *ten years from today*, not today's prices
Which are anticipated to go up, as the materials become more rare, and environmental regulations make it harder to dispose of them. Who knows what will really happen, as recycling efforts may keep costs down once materials become scarce. Who knows though?
What do you mean by a "map" - if you mean a "map" as in "a data structure used to locate the XML tags" then that describes most every XML DOM implementation. When the XML is loaded and parsed, the tags are placed into what I would prefer to call an "index" that helps identify the location of the tags and the structure of the document. XPATH implementations use this heavily.
If I misunderstood, could you reply with a clarification? Sorry, I'm at work and I don't have time to read the patent myself right now.
Judging from the video, the software doesn't use the camera at all. It uses the GPS and the compass. Overlaying the information over the camera is just eye candy. This is "augmented reality" in the same way that a satellite map is. Or displaying any information over a camera image. It sure feels cool though.
You have installed the Google toolbar, or some other thing, which makes it so that you can just anything into the address bar and it will automatically do a Google search. Or if you misspell a web site, it will do a Google search and redirect you to the correct site. With Comcast's change, your Google search bar will not work. Instead, it will take you to Comcast's special page.
I think that doesn't work for two reasons: 1) Nothing stops them from offering a really tiny tiny amount of neutral bandwidth 2) It will still influence the markets - Let me clarify this last point. One of the problems with a non-neutral internet is that if a major ISP partners with one content provider, it puts the others at a disadvantage, which impacts the market. Imagine if Comcast decided that Amazon was their preferred MP3 store, so it got a full 20-Mbps; but the iTunes music store only got 7Mbps. People will perceive the Amazon store as faster, and spend more money there. It has unfairly biased the free market system.
It would be similar to having wider roads go to Home Depot stores than are going to Lowes stores. The fact that there is a guaranteed to be at least some road, at least one lane wide that goes to Lowes, does not fix the problem. Fundamentally, the road system must be neutral. Same with bandwidth providers. Same with transportation (which is where the term "common carrier" came from). Attempts like yours allow loopholes, and create a mess like what the US tax code has become.
Ironically, the article is about how Microsoft is redefining a term to meet their needs. Yet somehow it is okay for OSI to define what "open source" means. Their definition is a good one, but not the only valid one.
A potential use for such flights is a 1 hour trip between any two points on the globe. Plus, I think you can clearly see the shape of the earth - which to me, would make it feel f'n C.O.O.L.
Because you don't have to register copyrights, and nobody does. Heck - most companies enforce this type of thing through trade secrets and contracts, not copyrights. Nobody gets access to closed source code anymore without signing an NDA.
The bug resides in DD-WRT's hyper text transfer protocol daemon, which runs as root.
Whhaaat??? And the command looks like:
http://routerIP/cgi-bin/;command_to_execute
Whhaaat???
This is a bug even Adobe would be ashamed to admit. An http server, running as root, accepts arbitrary commands, without authentication, embedded in a URL? That's not a bug thats... that's a design flaw... no... that's... unbelievable!
Is there a legitimate reason that the http daemon runs as root? (It is for embedded devices...) Or that commands are accepted over HTTP GET like that?
Slashdot Mirror
correlation != causation
I didn't think the article said that gaming made someone depressed.
What regulation are you proposing? That sellers must inform buyers of environmental dangers present on property before it is sold?
In a world where companies are being pressured to reduce the standby power consumption of devices, when electricity prices are rising, while "wall warts" are wasting a significant amount of power... are we sure this is a good time to trade efficiency for convenience?
You misunderstand. The regulation is what established the monopoly in the first place. The municipalities made laws stating that there can only be one cable provider. So it does not make sense to sue the cable provider for being the only one.
The solution is to change the government regulation. There needs to be only one provider of cable wires, but multiple providers of cable service. Just like with power: there are many power companies providing power in a given area, but only one company who maintains the lines. I should be able to use AOL, or Toad Net, or Joe's ISP over my cable lines.
If you remember, a decade ago, this is how things were. There were these really old lines that used to be used for analog telephones -- remember those? Back before cell phones? And every ISP had a "phone number" that you could "dial" to connect to them. It was slow, but the system was using the right model. We need to get back to that.
This is within the jurisdiction of the DOJ and the FTC, not the FCC.
People seem to assume that if something involves communications, that every aspect of it must be patrolled by the FCC. They also seem to assume the reverse is also true: That if the FCC has no comment, then no one else has jurisdiction and it is okay. Both assumptions are false.
The FTC should also be looking into cell phone tying. I'm unclear why the FCC is involved. Tying of cell phone providers does not interfere with anyone's radio frequencies.
RealMedia should apply for a DMCA Excemption? (Although other attempts at exceptions for this purpose have failed)
Fair use does exist as a "right" according to the copyright act of 1976.
There's no conflict.
Law #1: You are permitted to make backups of DVDs.
Law #2: You are not permitted to make or possess software that makes backups of DVDs.
This trial is against RealMedia, who is making software that makes backups of DVDs. RealMedia is not trying to actually make backups of DVDs. Hence, law #1 is irrelevant.
Now, if someone had such software, then still unambiguous that you are in violation of law #2. Does that make law #1 pointless? Yes, but there is still no ambiguity. If you could find a way to make backups without possessing software that makes backups -- then yes, you would be able to excercise your right.
It's absurd, but not in conflict.
I agree with you, but...
It still runs on its original nickel-iron batteries.
That type of battery excels at long life, but has poor storage capacity. Today, we use NiMH and Li-Ion which are chosen for capacity, but have poor reliability.
Where does this myth that the batteries are fundamentally going to have to be replaced come from?
It comes from experience: as you say, laptop batteries die after a few years. It is also made worse by exaggerated claims from the manufacturers. Apple claims their new battery gets 8 hours, yet no reviewer has ever gotten that. A friend of mine has one, and he said he gets 3-4 hours.
And *even if they do have to be replaced*, you're talking about battery prices *ten years from today*, not today's prices
Which are anticipated to go up, as the materials become more rare, and environmental regulations make it harder to dispose of them. Who knows what will really happen, as recycling efforts may keep costs down once materials become scarce. Who knows though?
What do you mean by a "map" - if you mean a "map" as in "a data structure used to locate the XML tags" then that describes most every XML DOM implementation. When the XML is loaded and parsed, the tags are placed into what I would prefer to call an "index" that helps identify the location of the tags and the structure of the document. XPATH implementations use this heavily.
If I misunderstood, could you reply with a clarification? Sorry, I'm at work and I don't have time to read the patent myself right now.
Judging from the video, the software doesn't use the camera at all. It uses the GPS and the compass. Overlaying the information over the camera is just eye candy. This is "augmented reality" in the same way that a satellite map is. Or displaying any information over a camera image. It sure feels cool though.
Dammit! I CANNOT find the red terminal on this monkey!
on keeping everything suitable for a 6 year old?
Elementary school dictionaries have these words in them too. Many 6 year-olds even go through the effort of highlighting them.
You have installed the Google toolbar, or some other thing, which makes it so that you can just anything into the address bar and it will automatically do a Google search. Or if you misspell a web site, it will do a Google search and redirect you to the correct site. With Comcast's change, your Google search bar will not work. Instead, it will take you to Comcast's special page.
Adding an optimization does not mean that the previous revision was a bug.
I think that doesn't work for two reasons:
1) Nothing stops them from offering a really tiny tiny amount of neutral bandwidth
2) It will still influence the markets
- Let me clarify this last point. One of the problems with a non-neutral internet is that if a major ISP partners with one content provider, it puts the others at a disadvantage, which impacts the market. Imagine if Comcast decided that Amazon was their preferred MP3 store, so it got a full 20-Mbps; but the iTunes music store only got 7Mbps. People will perceive the Amazon store as faster, and spend more money there. It has unfairly biased the free market system.
It would be similar to having wider roads go to Home Depot stores than are going to Lowes stores. The fact that there is a guaranteed to be at least some road, at least one lane wide that goes to Lowes, does not fix the problem. Fundamentally, the road system must be neutral. Same with bandwidth providers. Same with transportation (which is where the term "common carrier" came from). Attempts like yours allow loopholes, and create a mess like what the US tax code has become.
Ironically, the article is about how Microsoft is redefining a term to meet their needs. Yet somehow it is okay for OSI to define what "open source" means. Their definition is a good one, but not the only valid one.
you can't ride it legally in most places,
That is an effect of the hate, not a root cause.
A potential use for such flights is a 1 hour trip between any two points on the globe. Plus, I think you can clearly see the shape of the earth - which to me, would make it feel f'n C.O.O.L.
Better keep a lot of quarters around. :-)
Why would anyone want to steal a pay phone?
Include war in your calculations.
Because you don't have to register copyrights, and nobody does. Heck - most companies enforce this type of thing through trade secrets and contracts, not copyrights. Nobody gets access to closed source code anymore without signing an NDA.
The bug resides in DD-WRT's hyper text transfer protocol daemon, which runs as root.
Whhaaat??? And the command looks like:
http://routerIP/cgi-bin/;command_to_execute
Whhaaat???
This is a bug even Adobe would be ashamed to admit. An http server, running as root, accepts arbitrary commands, without authentication, embedded in a URL? That's not a bug thats... that's a design flaw... no... that's... unbelievable!
Is there a legitimate reason that the http daemon runs as root? (It is for embedded devices...) Or that commands are accepted over HTTP GET like that?
Get StepMania.