I'm not sure if you're a troll, or just uninformed, so here goes;
I format shift my dvds to my entertainment center computer -- I don't give copies out to anyone -- but this simple act of format shifting dvds is criminalized under this bill (as dvds have copy protection that must be circumvented in order to format shift them). If it passes I will be a criminal -- as will almost everyone I know. Hence my vehement opposition.
As a previously loyal conservative voter, I cannot vote for the conservatives this time largely due to C61. I have been thrust, unwillingly, into the arms of the NDP as they are the only one of the three major parties in Canada with a rational position on the subject. This bill proposes to make a criminal of me and virtually everyone I know.
I will be donating money and volunteering my time to ensure that the conservatives do not attain a majority.
That and Harper and Prentice are both industrial strength douchebags. Both of them can go straight to hell as far as I am concerned.
You can leave it up to your employer's lawyers to decide if you like, but it's *your* personal ass on the line of you fail to follow the law here, not your employer's -- when it comes to your ass, you should not necessarily trust someone else's lawyer.
> You have to do that as part of the patent application process anyway!
Actually, no, you don't. You have an obligation (and it continues right up until the patent issues) to disclose any relevant prior art you know of -- or, for that matter any information you know that could affect, in any way, the patent examiners decisions.
But you are under no obligation to go *looking* for that information. That's the examiners job.
Of course I'm not a lawyer, but that's what they tell me when I do file patents. (yes, I'm an evil software patenter -- there goes my karma)
Your lawyer may say something different -- if you are filing a patent, I suggest you listen to him, and not me on this subject:-).
Back to the original subject at hand -- if you do find prior art, it would save the company money by not patenting -- which does cost 10 to 20k per. And whether you send this notice by email or not, you can and should insist on meeting your obligations under law to disclose that prior art to the patent office when and if you file for a patent.
You are correct that code needs to be rewritten and even rearchitected -- the old way of doing things in GL is often a very poor match for today's hardware, and GL is pretty crufty these days -- but it would be nice to be able to do the rewrites incrementally over several releases as opposed to all at once (incrementally with multiple contexts is not so nice either). That said, I think it would have been better had GL3.0 been what we had been expecting as opposed to GL2.2, which is what we got.
Barthold Lichtenbelt made a good post recently on the OpenGL newsgroup explaining how things got to this point. You should check it out.
Imagine you were the owner of a CAD or Animation software company. I suppose that when you have multiple OpenGL apps each with 10s of millions of lines of code, it's pretty hard to justify a rewrite from a business standpoint. Those "old stale" code bases each generate 100s of millions of dollars each year, and they're orders of magnitude larger and more complex than games. It would take millions of $$ to port one of the major OpenGl apps to another API, and from a business standpoint, those $$ would be wasted -- they wouldn't be doing anything other than chasing someone else's aims and objectives -- not doing anything that would generate a decent return on the investment.
Your customers don't care what the underlying API is that you use -- what they care is that you solve their problems in a cost effective way. If OpenGL3.x was a complete and incompatible break -- these companies would think "well if those a$$h0les are going to make us rewrite the software, we might as well jump to DX instead and be done with it" (At least if you don't have to support mac and linux).
It's not too hard for people to figure out who I work for so let me add that these are my opinions only -- my employer may share them, or they may not -- I certainly make no representations in this -- but these opinions are mine.
Point me at a monitor that can be had for *any* amount of money which fits my criteria -- >= 23" diagonal, >= 130 dpi, led backlight, >= 8 bits/channel. I haven't found one. Yes that one is "par" by your definition -- but then I happen to think that the vast majority of monitors out there are horrible. I'm not asking for one that meets my spec to be cheap -- I'd be willing to pay serious money for it. The closest I've ever seen was IBMs T221 -- but it was not led backlit, only 22 inch, and it was *very* serious money -- well over 10k
I think the mechanism he alludes to is the globally synchronized PMS that would inevitably precede. Much like a nuclear holocaust, the few unfortunate survivors would envy the dead.
This is very true -- and that native resolution is pretty sub-par as well. For a monitor that size I'd like to see an absolute minimum of 1920x1200 pixels. I'm pretty spoiled by the 17" 1920x1200 monitor in my macbook pro -- even though it is TN, it is very, very sharp.
Also this thing apparently has no led backlighting either.
All in all, this is a real yawner. Wake me up when someone has a 23 or 24 inch led backlight monitor with true 8 or 10 bits per channel, and a dot pitch in excess of 130/inch.
I'm afraid this would not be that hard to throttle. It's not hard to detect "snow" images.
If your technique takes off, you will start an arms race that will end as soon as your data looks sufficiently different from normal http. And if it looks alot like normal http, your data rate will be terrible as you will be hiding the real information with lots of chaff...
I suspect you will shortly be entertaining some gentlemen in dark suits with earpieces. I hear they have no sense of humor concerning this particular subject.
If I tell someone I'm "developing a plan to explore" implementing X, what I mean is that I will probably never get around to *actually* implementing X -- X is likely to be implemented roughly at the same time hell freezes over -- I just want you to go away and leave me alone, as I have more important things to do *right now*. (like reading/., for example:-)
It's not just incompatible -- it's also 33% slower.
And if you order today, you'll also get a nice pile of shiny new bugs for only the cost of shipping and handling. Don't wait! Call now! The first 100 callers will also receive a free kick to the testicles.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure if you're a troll, or just uninformed, so here goes;
I format shift my dvds to my entertainment center computer -- I don't give copies out to anyone -- but this simple act of format shifting dvds is criminalized under this bill (as dvds have copy protection that must be circumvented in order to format shift them). If it passes I will be a criminal -- as will almost everyone I know. Hence my vehement opposition.
As a previously loyal conservative voter, I cannot vote for the conservatives this time largely due to C61. I have been thrust, unwillingly, into the arms of the NDP as they are the only one of the three major parties in Canada with a rational position on the subject. This bill proposes to make a criminal of me and virtually everyone I know.
I will be donating money and volunteering my time to ensure that the conservatives do not attain a majority.
That and Harper and Prentice are both industrial strength douchebags. Both of them can go straight to hell as far as I am concerned.
You can leave it up to your employer's lawyers to decide if you like, but it's *your* personal ass on the line of you fail to follow the law here, not your employer's -- when it comes to your ass, you should not necessarily trust someone else's lawyer.
> You have to do that as part of the patent application process anyway!
Actually, no, you don't. You have an obligation (and it continues right up until the patent issues) to disclose any relevant prior art you know of -- or, for that matter any information you know that could affect, in any way, the patent examiners decisions.
But you are under no obligation to go *looking* for that information. That's the examiners job.
Of course I'm not a lawyer, but that's what they tell me when I do file patents. (yes, I'm an evil software patenter -- there goes my karma)
Your lawyer may say something different -- if you are filing a patent, I suggest you listen to him, and not me on this subject :-).
Back to the original subject at hand -- if you do find prior art, it would save the company money by not patenting -- which does cost 10 to 20k per. And whether you send this notice by email or not, you can and should insist on meeting your obligations under law to disclose that prior art to the patent office when and if you file for a patent.
You are correct that code needs to be rewritten and even rearchitected -- the old way of doing things in GL is often a very poor match for today's hardware, and GL is pretty crufty these days -- but it would be nice to be able to do the rewrites incrementally over several releases as opposed to all at once (incrementally with multiple contexts is not so nice either). That said, I think it would have been better had GL3.0 been what we had been expecting as opposed to GL2.2, which is what we got.
Barthold Lichtenbelt made a good post recently on the OpenGL newsgroup explaining how things got to this point. You should check it out.
Imagine you were the owner of a CAD or Animation software company. I suppose that when you have multiple OpenGL apps each with 10s of millions of lines of code, it's pretty hard to justify a rewrite from a business standpoint. Those "old stale" code bases each generate 100s of millions of dollars each year, and they're orders of magnitude larger and more complex than games. It would take millions of $$ to port one of the major OpenGl apps to another API, and from a business standpoint, those $$ would be wasted -- they wouldn't be doing anything other than chasing someone else's aims and objectives -- not doing anything that would generate a decent return on the investment.
Your customers don't care what the underlying API is that you use -- what they care is that you solve their problems in a cost effective way. If OpenGL3.x was a complete and incompatible break -- these companies would think "well if those a$$h0les are going to make us rewrite the software, we might as well jump to DX instead and be done with it" (At least if you don't have to support mac and linux).
It's not too hard for people to figure out who I work for so let me add that these are my opinions only -- my employer may share them, or they may not -- I certainly make no representations in this -- but these opinions are mine.
> and in the end any direct action would be vetoed by China.
And likely Russia too. :-)
(Flying there later today... Russia, that is, not China or an asteroid, although I'm sure are those who would prefer I travel to the latter :-)
> electricity doesn't just grow on trees you know...
It does if you generate electricity by burning firewood :-)
Point me at a monitor that can be had for *any* amount of money which fits my criteria -- >= 23" diagonal, >= 130 dpi, led backlight, >= 8 bits/channel. I haven't found one. Yes that one is "par" by your definition -- but then I happen to think that the vast majority of monitors out there are horrible. I'm not asking for one that meets my spec to be cheap -- I'd be willing to pay serious money for it. The closest I've ever seen was IBMs T221 -- but it was not led backlit, only 22 inch, and it was *very* serious money -- well over 10k
I think the mechanism he alludes to is the globally synchronized PMS that would inevitably precede. Much like a nuclear holocaust, the few unfortunate survivors would envy the dead.
This is very true -- and that native resolution is pretty sub-par as well. For a monitor that size I'd like to see an absolute minimum of 1920x1200 pixels. I'm pretty spoiled by the 17" 1920x1200 monitor in my macbook pro -- even though it is TN, it is very, very sharp.
Also this thing apparently has no led backlighting either.
All in all, this is a real yawner. Wake me up when someone has a 23 or 24 inch led backlight monitor with true 8 or 10 bits per channel, and a dot pitch in excess of 130/inch.
> which would hold recent (legal) P2P content ...
Yeah -- THAT will solve P2P congestion. (Morons)
Whatever you do, don't answer if it asks you if those pants make it's back end look large. :-)
I'm afraid this would not be that hard to throttle. It's not hard to detect "snow" images. If your technique takes off, you will start an arms race that will end as soon as your data looks sufficiently different from normal http. And if it looks alot like normal http, your data rate will be terrible as you will be hiding the real information with lots of chaff...
I suspect you will shortly be entertaining some gentlemen in dark suits with earpieces. I hear they have no sense of humor concerning this particular subject.
You think the shuffle is uncomfortable -- try the classic. Never mind a 17" macbook pro.
Mod parent up... His is one of the best on this topic.
Or alcohol based ones for that matter... :-)
Or hybrids (I currently have coffee and baileys flowing through my circulatory system
I expect that they will combine this snooping with throttling of all encrypted (or otherwise random) looking packets.
I, for one, welcome our new carbon based overlords :-)
Seriously, however, I don't expect to see a CPU based on this anytime soon.
This first post is public domain and I therefore have no property taxes to pay on it
At least it's not Surströmming -- the entire space station would be rendered permanently uninhabitable merely by opening one can of the stuff.
"develop a plan to explore"
/., for example :-)
If I tell someone I'm "developing a plan to explore" implementing X, what I mean is that I will probably never get around to *actually* implementing X -- X is likely to be implemented roughly at the same time hell freezes over -- I just want you to go away and leave me alone, as I have more important things to do *right now*. (like reading
It's not just incompatible -- it's also 33% slower.
And if you order today, you'll also get a nice pile of shiny new bugs for only the cost of shipping and handling.
Don't wait! Call now!
The first 100 callers will also receive a free kick to the testicles.
This brings to mind the question: WHICH string theory? (of the roughly 10^500 possible ones).
Does it make any testable predictions? What? No? Oh well then.