I'm going to do a search on google right now. I'll check back and see if you can tell me what it was.
HTTP in the clear is potentially viewable by a reasonably determined attacker, but that's a hell of a long way from "fully open to the public and viewable by all."
Its not like what you transmit to a search engine via the internet is private and secured.
If it's not private, why is there a privacy policy governing it?
Are you kidding? I doubt Stallman has ever been in a fight. In fact, I think that he is nominally a pacifist.
Now, Eric Raymond on the other hand . . .
-Peter
Re:Interactive services?
on
A Look at IPTV
·
· Score: 2, Informative
In the US, do we see much interactive penetration?
A single operator serves over half of the ITV enabled set tops in the US. Echostar (Dish Network) is the only operator in the position to have significant interactive penetration as the market stands today.
Echostar held their ITV summit Friday. CNN just launched their Enhanced TV service on Echostar. The representative from CNN was very clear that launching on Echostar was the obvious choice because they had the set tops deployed to make it worthwhile.
There is a real chicken-or-the-egg problem with ITV. Because of the infrastructure involved it can't grow organically like the Internet. First the ITV enabled boxes have to be in the field. Then the content has to be there. Then, and only then, the operator has to make the users aware that there is all this additional value in the service they already have. Echostar is really only now entering the third stage. (With the new portal and their "trigger" functionality.) I expect big things in the next couple of years. The other US providers are really all in the first stage. On the other hand, several providers have ITV capable STBs, but no middleware. (My employer, OpenTV, would love to help all comers remedy that situation!)
To sort of bring this back on topic, Echostar has launched its first generation of IPTV enabled set tops. (With MPEG-4 and Ethernet.)
What tech workers, and office workers in general, have failed to grasp is that these conditions exist because of the efforts of organized labor over the last century or so
Is it possible that "tech workers" have it relatively good because the demand outstrips the supply, driving the price curve up? (And by extension because it is cheaper to retain employees with a decent salary and a decent work environment than my paying them enough to tolerate working in a shithole.)
I'm not going to get into a discussion on the symantics [sic] of the word "private".
It seems to be exactly the point. Is the idea that people who don't do manual labor should be forbidden to own property?
In any case, it seems that one of three things are the case. Either 1. I lack the intellectual capacity to comprehend this system, 2. This system is a bunch of incomprehensible arm-waving, or 3. Your only use as an advocate is in recommending that book.
Form factor: They just prefer the feel and 'interface' of a paper book.
Your use of the word "just" seems dismissive. There are quantifiable advantages to paper. The contrast ratio of a cheap paperback is spectacular compared to what any ebook seems to offer. At the same time the light that is reflected by the page is far more diffuse than anything an ebook screen can do.
Additionally, we use tactile bookmarks without effort or thought. Being able to flip (again, tactilely) is a huge feature that we rarely think of. But how often have you flipped a few pages to see if you're coming up on a chapter break? Also, simply holding the book while reading gives a very clear idea of how long it is, how far into it you are, and how much is left.
Also, the "device" is the problem. The fact that books are inexpensive and completely self-contained is a huge feature. With ebooks you need to worry about vendor-lock and other format problems. And you have to keep track of a relatively expensive device. Grabbing a copy of Chriton's latest disaster book in ebook format at the airport doesn't do you much good if you don't have your $200 reader on hand.
Finally, and I can only speak for myself on this point, I have an emotional attachment to many of my books. How can you have that with a bunch of bits?
(This isn't a rant against ebooks. I've read tons of books on my Palm. Ebooks have a bunch of advantages . . . but that wasn't the question!)
Workers in contrast to whom? Are "the workers" not private citizens? How is this not private property? (Or if it is held "in common" how is that not a government?)
I did a little research. Apparently he doesn't want governmental or private ownership of "the means of production". I'm hazy on who this leaves in practical terms. Can you explain this, or point me to a source that does?
Bobby was fearful of his employer knowing the details of his illness and so the succession plans that would have made things easier for both of them were not in place. As a result, neither my brother nor his employer was properly prepared for his death.
I think this example amplifies your point. How is it that Bobby wasn't prepared? I don't mean this in a cruel or uncaring way, but I am quite sure that his employer's predicament didn't hinder his passing.
Well, someone said, "They can't own and modify a copy that is closed source. IE, they can't take the product, and produce a non-open source product (legally)".
There is no question that the copyright holder of a Free Software package may re-license it. That's not at issue.
But that isn't what you said. You said that they CAN'T make a modified version WITHOUT this move. I suspect you're right, but I have no specific knowledge that Israeli copyright law prevents them. I imagine Israel is party to Berne, and that Berne covers this case, etc. etc., but I don't know. I suspect you don't either.
I'm not trying to flame you or to call you out, but I don't see the value in confidently oversimplifying it.
Slashdot Mirror
I thought I bought the DVD, but licensed the movie. I'd be perfectly willing to buy the HD-DVD . . . but why should I re-license the movie?
-Peter
Sure capsaicin kills intestinal cells. But only the weak ones!
Bloody Marys, the ultimate health tonic! *hic*
-Peter
Monkey Island.
This seems like a tacit admission that "Image Constraint Token" is a mis-feature.
-Peter
Grumberto? Is that you?
-Peter
George Bush's head a-splode.
-Peter
What? What the fuck are you talking about?
I'm going to do a search on google right now. I'll check back and see if you can tell me what it was.
HTTP in the clear is potentially viewable by a reasonably determined attacker, but that's a hell of a long way from "fully open to the public and viewable by all."
If it's not private, why is there a privacy policy governing it?
-Peter
Yes, but does it include a self-destruct device that can destroy enough rainforest to cover 300 city blocks?
-Peter
Are you kidding? I doubt Stallman has ever been in a fight. In fact, I think that he is nominally a pacifist.
Now, Eric Raymond on the other hand . . .
-Peter
A single operator serves over half of the ITV enabled set tops in the US. Echostar (Dish Network) is the only operator in the position to have significant interactive penetration as the market stands today.
Echostar held their ITV summit Friday. CNN just launched their Enhanced TV service on Echostar. The representative from CNN was very clear that launching on Echostar was the obvious choice because they had the set tops deployed to make it worthwhile.
There is a real chicken-or-the-egg problem with ITV. Because of the infrastructure involved it can't grow organically like the Internet. First the ITV enabled boxes have to be in the field. Then the content has to be there. Then, and only then, the operator has to make the users aware that there is all this additional value in the service they already have. Echostar is really only now entering the third stage. (With the new portal and their "trigger" functionality.) I expect big things in the next couple of years. The other US providers are really all in the first stage. On the other hand, several providers have ITV capable STBs, but no middleware. (My employer, OpenTV, would love to help all comers remedy that situation!)
To sort of bring this back on topic, Echostar has launched its first generation of IPTV enabled set tops. (With MPEG-4 and Ethernet.)
-Peter
. . . booze used to treat alcoholism.
-Peter
Is it possible that "tech workers" have it relatively good because the demand outstrips the supply, driving the price curve up? (And by extension because it is cheaper to retain employees with a decent salary and a decent work environment than my paying them enough to tolerate working in a shithole.)
-Peter
It seems to be exactly the point. Is the idea that people who don't do manual labor should be forbidden to own property?
In any case, it seems that one of three things are the case. Either 1. I lack the intellectual capacity to comprehend this system, 2. This system is a bunch of incomprehensible arm-waving, or 3. Your only use as an advocate is in recommending that book.
In any case, I'll read the book.
-Peter
To repeat myself, how is this not private property?
-Peter
Your use of the word "just" seems dismissive. There are quantifiable advantages to paper. The contrast ratio of a cheap paperback is spectacular compared to what any ebook seems to offer. At the same time the light that is reflected by the page is far more diffuse than anything an ebook screen can do.
Additionally, we use tactile bookmarks without effort or thought. Being able to flip (again, tactilely) is a huge feature that we rarely think of. But how often have you flipped a few pages to see if you're coming up on a chapter break? Also, simply holding the book while reading gives a very clear idea of how long it is, how far into it you are, and how much is left.
Also, the "device" is the problem. The fact that books are inexpensive and completely self-contained is a huge feature. With ebooks you need to worry about vendor-lock and other format problems. And you have to keep track of a relatively expensive device. Grabbing a copy of Chriton's latest disaster book in ebook format at the airport doesn't do you much good if you don't have your $200 reader on hand.
Finally, and I can only speak for myself on this point, I have an emotional attachment to many of my books. How can you have that with a bunch of bits?
(This isn't a rant against ebooks. I've read tons of books on my Palm. Ebooks have a bunch of advantages . . . but that wasn't the question!)
-Peter
What the fuck is an IMHO, and what does it have to do with a RTFA?
-Peter
Workers in contrast to whom? Are "the workers" not private citizens? How is this not private property? (Or if it is held "in common" how is that not a government?)
Again, I really am seeking to understand here.
-Peter
I did a little research. Apparently he doesn't want governmental or private ownership of "the means of production". I'm hazy on who this leaves in practical terms. Can you explain this, or point me to a source that does?
Please understand that I am sincerely interested.
-Peter
I think this example amplifies your point. How is it that Bobby wasn't prepared? I don't mean this in a cruel or uncaring way, but I am quite sure that his employer's predicament didn't hinder his passing.
-Peter
Well, when it comes to Eugenics Wars it's better late than never.
KHAAAAAAAAAN!
-Peter
I thought the max resolution was 1920 x 1200, with max HD resolution being 1920 x 1080.
I'm planning to buy one, and if this is wrong that's a deal-breaker.
-Peter
Well, someone said, "They can't own and modify a copy that is closed source. IE, they can't take the product, and produce a non-open source product (legally)".
Please pardon my confusion.
-Peter
There is no question that the copyright holder of a Free Software package may re-license it. That's not at issue.
But that isn't what you said. You said that they CAN'T make a modified version WITHOUT this move. I suspect you're right, but I have no specific knowledge that Israeli copyright law prevents them. I imagine Israel is party to Berne, and that Berne covers this case, etc. etc., but I don't know. I suspect you don't either.
I'm not trying to flame you or to call you out, but I don't see the value in confidently oversimplifying it.
-Peter
Does your knowledge of Israeli law really justify your unequivocal statement?
-Peter
Mmmmmm. Bologna and Cheese Whiz. *Drool*
Wait, did I miss a point?
-Peter