It's nice to finally see a journalist who is at least moderately informed on this issue. More coverage like this will be needed though to bring greater understanding to the majority public. The Hatch'esque philosophy of absolute IP supremacy over legitimate use of technology will do great harm to innovation if it's adopted by the masses. The xxAA orgs would like nothing better than this, but ultimately the consumer would lose.
This is a totally non-enforced policy at GT. A ran a WAP all last year (and this year) without any problem. It helps if you disable the SSID broadcast to conceal it better. But it really doesn't matter. Last year my CA even found out about it and came by my room to tell me it was not permitted. I told him to fuck off and after that no one else ever bothered me about it.
At my school the OIT office has an auto virus scan that is run the first time a user connects (after they register their MAC). If it finds any viruses it doesn't let them on the network until the owner gets rid of them. I don't use Windows (and hence don't have viruses) so I'm not sure how effective it is, but it sounds like a good idea.
Since MS has already bought off the DOJ (and apparently the USPTO), what makes you believe they'd lose?
Since these patents are so laughable that dozens of sources of prior art could be cited immediately, what makes you think the judge wouldn't grant summary dismissal the moment he/she saw the case?
On the other hand it's going to be tough in the meantime for the small developer to be caught up in small web page navigation patents and such in court.
Nothing to worry about there. It will never happen. If M$ were to actually file a suit over any of these stupid patents, it would only draw attention to how completely baseless they are and might even cause their patent hoarding spree to come to a halt. Besides, there are too many people to sue. There were doubtless hundreds of infringers of this one the moment it was granted (pretty much every non-M$ browser).
You can never have a completely neutral point of view. On almost any topic, you can spin it to what you want to say. I've read a number of articles on Wikipedia that, while not specifically stating an opinion as fact, clearly had a definite persuasive intent conveyed in the tone of the article. In some cases important facts that are relevant to the topic but opposite to the clearly obvious opinion of the author are simply omitted.
It's a shame that this whole situation still gets treated like this. A lot of people know and it still continues. All the data is there for anyone that wants to see it. SETI puts the face on it that mainstream scientists are willing to accept.
No matter how complex encryption algorithms get, there will always be a faster computer that comes along to break them. That is, until quantum computing becomes widespread.
Why is that though? What if you payed for the cable channel that Star Trek is broadcast on. You are able to legally record it from the channel via a vcr or tivo or computer or whatever. Why is it you can not obtain the episode via the internet?
That was exactly my thinking. I wasn't even going to keep a copy of it, just watch it once.
The only other possible case I could see where this could be harmful to the content creator is if that episode was available on DVD (like the other ST series) and they suspected file sharing would hurt DVD sales. But that wasn't the case here.
No, BitTorrent has been worse for me. This is completely true.
I've used FastTrack/Gnutella/OpenFT for a while now and never had a problem there. I used BitTorrent to download an episode of Star Trek Enterprise, and got a letter from my ISP forwarded from Paramount stating that I was liable for infringement. Ultimately nothing came of it, but they were obviously able to get my IP quite easily.
Yeah I mean, let's just bring the immigrants in by the truckload if they want to come. And if they don't want to come we'll just give them the jobs of American workers so they're still happy. Does Mr. Bush think he is the President of the world, or does he just feel that he needs to give equal benefits to US citizens AND non-citizens.
Slashdot Mirror
It's nice to finally see a journalist who is at least moderately informed on this issue. More coverage like this will be needed though to bring greater understanding to the majority public. The Hatch'esque philosophy of absolute IP supremacy over legitimate use of technology will do great harm to innovation if it's adopted by the masses. The xxAA orgs would like nothing better than this, but ultimately the consumer would lose.
How much pr0n is that?
Since you only have 93 total comments, how would that category apply to you?
For the rest, there's my Zombie Army of Evil.
According to your subject line, money can buy that too.
This is a totally non-enforced policy at GT. A ran a WAP all last year (and this year) without any problem. It helps if you disable the SSID broadcast to conceal it better. But it really doesn't matter. Last year my CA even found out about it and came by my room to tell me it was not permitted. I told him to fuck off and after that no one else ever bothered me about it.
Checkmate.
Doh! No Fair!
I'm bald you insensitive clod!
At my school the OIT office has an auto virus scan that is run the first time a user connects (after they register their MAC). If it finds any viruses it doesn't let them on the network until the owner gets rid of them. I don't use Windows (and hence don't have viruses) so I'm not sure how effective it is, but it sounds like a good idea.
Well, they had it first.
Since MS has already bought off the DOJ (and apparently the USPTO), what makes you believe they'd lose?
Since these patents are so laughable that dozens of sources of prior art could be cited immediately, what makes you think the judge wouldn't grant summary dismissal the moment he/she saw the case?
On the other hand it's going to be tough in the meantime for the small developer to be caught up in small web page navigation patents and such in court.
Nothing to worry about there. It will never happen. If M$ were to actually file a suit over any of these stupid patents, it would only draw attention to how completely baseless they are and might even cause their patent hoarding spree to come to a halt. Besides, there are too many people to sue. There were doubtless hundreds of infringers of this one the moment it was granted (pretty much every non-M$ browser).
You can never have a completely neutral point of view. On almost any topic, you can spin it to what you want to say. I've read a number of articles on Wikipedia that, while not specifically stating an opinion as fact, clearly had a definite persuasive intent conveyed in the tone of the article. In some cases important facts that are relevant to the topic but opposite to the clearly obvious opinion of the author are simply omitted.
Apart from MIT, and Windows, who uses Kerberos nowadays?
Quite a few scientific, governmental, and higher education institutions use Kerberos for authentication across thousands of machines.
You can always hotrod a classic model. Mandatory things like this are never retroactively required for cars that can't support them.
for the hardcorest tinfoil hatters among us
It's a shame that this whole situation still gets treated like this. A lot of people know and it still continues. All the data is there for anyone that wants to see it. SETI puts the face on it that mainstream scientists are willing to accept.
No matter how complex encryption algorithms get, there will always be a faster computer that comes along to break them. That is, until quantum computing becomes widespread.
that at the upcoming press conference SCO will announce that IBM does not exist.
This will dissipate any investors' fears pertaining to the validity of the lawsuit.
SCO announced that "photons do not exist."
True, but I don't really need huge upstream speed for anything.
It won't be long. One of my local DSL providers (I live in Atlanta) offers 6Mbit service now.
Will MS suspend sales of Windows and Office until all the bugs are ironed out?
Why not simply suspend purchases of Windows and Office? Switch to something better.
Why is that though? What if you payed for the cable channel that Star Trek is broadcast on. You are able to legally record it from the channel via a vcr or tivo or computer or whatever. Why is it you can not obtain the episode via the internet?
That was exactly my thinking. I wasn't even going to keep a copy of it, just watch it once.
The only other possible case I could see where this could be harmful to the content creator is if that episode was available on DVD (like the other ST series) and they suspected file sharing would hurt DVD sales. But that wasn't the case here.
You cannot "only download" with BitTorrent. You have to upload at the same time.
No, BitTorrent has been worse for me. This is completely true.
I've used FastTrack/Gnutella/OpenFT for a while now and never had a problem there. I used BitTorrent to download an episode of Star Trek Enterprise, and got a letter from my ISP forwarded from Paramount stating that I was liable for infringement. Ultimately nothing came of it, but they were obviously able to get my IP quite easily.
Not to mention mass imigration
Yeah I mean, let's just bring the immigrants in by the truckload if they want to come. And if they don't want to come we'll just give them the jobs of American workers so they're still happy. Does Mr. Bush think he is the President of the world, or does he just feel that he needs to give equal benefits to US citizens AND non-citizens.