Actually, I was thinking the same about guy #1. I'm not particularly in favor of gun control (I do believe that the constitution is clear, and as such a constitutional amendment).
Of course, the issues aren't nearly that black and white. Hatch and Hollings are, by far, the two congressmen I hate most.
But the real advantage of trusted computing is to make it so that you can boot a machine and be certain that it is not running any type of trojan or malware.
Actually, it just means that when you get a DRM-Enabled virus or trojan, your anti-virus scanner can't detect it, because the memory is "protected". This _is_ one of the design goals, because if any program is able to read the memory of another, encryption keys can be extracted.
As the price of manufacturing (not production) approches zero, the market price will approach zero, unless restricted through the government (copyright, patent, etc.). The price of creation is naturally high, the price of duplication naturally low. Were it not for the government granted monopoly, they would need to change their business model to enable to make the film before others can duplicate it, or die.
Sounds like the free market to me. Moore has made his money from creation, the reproduction is just icing on the cake to him (albeit, not to the movie theaters).
"Do you have perfect pitch?" - I used to be play "name that pitch", and be dead on (8 or so years). I have, however, lost it to some degree, I suspect due to nonuse.
"Are you familiar with the literature on JND of auditory perception?" Nope - like I said, these were informal tests.
As for me, I recently had my hearing tested. The machine indicated I could hear to 0db (the limit of it's ability to test), for most of the frequencies it could test. The other ones were to 5db, and I can hear both above and below the limits of that machine in terms of frequency.
Pet peeve: People who leave televisions on which aren't showing any picture. Man, those high pitched noises are annoying!
I've ran a number of informal listening tests, and many of the people I tested cannot tell the difference between a 128kbps MP3 (LAME) and a 256kbps MP3 (LAME) consistently, even on good equipment. (Too much loud music as a teenager, perhaps)?
However, there most definatly are people who can tell the difference, and I am one of them. Personally, I like 200+ mpc (MusePack) files - MusePack seems to do a good job preserving the crispness, and "body" (don't know a better term for it) of the audio.
I don't have a problem with them using whatever copyright protection systems they want, provided that they don't use the force of law.
Without this broadcast flag mandate, consumers would have a choice. They could get either a uncrippled device, or a crippled device that is able to play some of the MPAAs titles. Which one they want is up to the market to decide, not the people who stand to benefit most from it.
The MPAA wants stations to pay to show their stuff. If not enough people can see it (due to their choice), the station won't bother showing it. Could the MPAA reach critical mass with protected devices? Perhaps, but I'd wager they could not without a government mandate.
The government should not be protecting bad business models.
You look like a troll, but I am a troll, so who am I to complain?
I have no problem with copyright holders defending their rights however they want, provided they don't have a government granted privelege that makes their rights take precedence over those of the people.
I wouldn't seek to take away their right to innovate if they would quit trying to take away mine. Don't stop the copyright holders, but don't stop the Digital cable manufacturers either.
If the market is unwilling to support restrictive copyright measures without a government mandate, the business model should be allowed fail on it's own. If the market will support works so restricted, the government intervention should be unnecessary.
Give me my fair use rights back, I won't bother breaking your protection. Failed business models don't deserve government protection.
Microsoft has been in alpha now for a bit with a product called "Windows NCD Technology" (I'm a tester). This is Apple's shot across MS's bow.
From the alpha page, Windows Network Connected Device (NCD) Technology is a comprehensive set of Windows technologies that allow devices on a local network to discover, communicate with, and control each other.
The disk uses 2 different TOCs (similar to multi-session). Computers (in general) load the second one, and the audio players load the first. The second one contains encrypted tracks, and a player to play them. It makes some ripping tools have a harder time.
But I'm against gun control precisely because I won't be a hypocrite who fights for the First Amendment and ignores that inconvenient Second one."
I was beginning to think that I was the only one that feels this way.
Personally, I think that large asssault rifles/fully automatic weapons etc. should be banned, however the second amendment is very very clear on this matter. If such things are to be regulated, it should be done with a constitutional amendment.
I don't know about you, but I use Daemon Tools to handle copy-protected software. Not only does it let me run even CD-Based software from the HD, it has the option to emulate many copy protection programs.
For example, with SafeDisc enabled, you need only install the software and run it once with emulation on. Daemon-tools will memorize which sectors are bad, and auto-skip them allowing you to burn a fully usable, copy protected version of the software in question.
You can also make a copy which would fail the copy protection check, then enable the emulation. The software will then pass, even if the CD is a copy.
Legality: They are licensed (and pay royalties to) ROMS, which under russian laws has the authority to license non-member music as well.
As for the U.S., importing of music not licensed here is allowed, provided it's for personal use (limited # of copies). The question is: "does this count as import". Well, ultimatly, it's up to the courts, but I would imagine it is, given that giving software (sequences of bits) to people outside the country still counts as export (and is subject to export controls).
When I try to load the Get The Facts site in IE, it loads just fine.
When I try to load it under Mozilla Firebird 0.7, I get redirected to http://www.microsoft.com/info/customerror.htm, with the error "We're sorry, we were unable to service your request. As an option, you may visit any of the pages below for information about Microsoft services and products."
Doesn't only showing the page to the people using your product kind of beat the purpose?
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, I was thinking the same about guy #1. I'm not particularly in favor of gun control (I do believe that the constitution is clear, and as such a constitutional amendment).
Of course, the issues aren't nearly that black and white. Hatch and Hollings are, by far, the two congressmen I hate most.
But the real advantage of trusted computing is to make it so that you can boot a machine and be certain that it is not running any type of trojan or malware.
Actually, it just means that when you get a DRM-Enabled virus or trojan, your anti-virus scanner can't detect it, because the memory is "protected". This _is_ one of the design goals, because if any program is able to read the memory of another, encryption keys can be extracted.
Hardware DRM will hurt the problem, not help it.
Likewise. As much as I want to send the message that I'm fed up with both major parties, getting Bush out is step 1.
Completly and totally offtopic (hey, I've truly got karma to burn) -
Is your email working, Simon - I had written in with a hostip contrib a couple days ago, and never got a response.
"What rights does the PATRIOT act grant the government against that security that they didn't already have via some other method?"
If it doesn't give them any new rights, why do they need it in the first place?
As the price of manufacturing (not production) approches zero, the market price will approach zero, unless restricted through the government (copyright, patent, etc.). The price of creation is naturally high, the price of duplication naturally low. Were it not for the government granted monopoly, they would need to change their business model to enable to make the film before others can duplicate it, or die.
Sounds like the free market to me. Moore has made his money from creation, the reproduction is just icing on the cake to him (albeit, not to the movie theaters).
"Do you have perfect pitch?"
- I used to be play "name that pitch", and be dead on (8 or so years). I have, however, lost it to some degree, I suspect due to nonuse.
"Are you familiar with the literature on JND of auditory perception?"
Nope - like I said, these were informal tests.
As for me, I recently had my hearing tested. The machine indicated I could hear to 0db (the limit of it's ability to test), for most of the frequencies it could test. The other ones were to 5db, and I can hear both above and below the limits of that machine in terms of frequency.
Pet peeve: People who leave televisions on which aren't showing any picture. Man, those high pitched noises are annoying!
I've ran a number of informal listening tests, and many of the people I tested cannot tell the difference between a 128kbps MP3 (LAME) and a 256kbps MP3 (LAME) consistently, even on good equipment. (Too much loud music as a teenager, perhaps)?
However, there most definatly are people who can tell the difference, and I am one of them. Personally, I like 200+ mpc (MusePack) files - MusePack seems to do a good job preserving the crispness, and "body" (don't know a better term for it) of the audio.
I don't have a problem with them using whatever copyright protection systems they want, provided that they don't use the force of law.
Without this broadcast flag mandate, consumers would have a choice. They could get either a uncrippled device, or a crippled device that is able to play some of the MPAAs titles. Which one they want is up to the market to decide, not the people who stand to benefit most from it.
The MPAA wants stations to pay to show their stuff. If not enough people can see it (due to their choice), the station won't bother showing it. Could the MPAA reach critical mass with protected devices? Perhaps, but I'd wager they could not without a government mandate.
The government should not be protecting bad business models.
You look like a troll, but I am a troll, so who am I to complain?
I have no problem with copyright holders defending their rights however they want, provided they don't have a government granted privelege that makes their rights take precedence over those of the people.
I wouldn't seek to take away their right to innovate if they would quit trying to take away mine. Don't stop the copyright holders, but don't stop the Digital cable manufacturers either.
If the market is unwilling to support restrictive copyright measures without a government mandate, the business model should be allowed fail on it's own. If the market will support works so restricted, the government intervention should be unnecessary.
Give me my fair use rights back, I won't bother breaking your protection. Failed business models don't deserve government protection.
GMail Invite sent - now change your stupid sig.
http://www.voltsamps.com
How about the new XP-Style taskbar? That's usually the first thing I disable. Taskbar grouping gets turned off second. (XP theme 3rd).
Microsoft has been in alpha now for a bit with a product called "Windows NCD Technology" (I'm a tester). This is Apple's shot across MS's bow.
From the alpha page, Windows Network Connected Device (NCD) Technology is a comprehensive set of Windows technologies that allow devices on a local network to discover, communicate with, and control each other.
The disk uses 2 different TOCs (similar to multi-session). Computers (in general) load the second one, and the audio players load the first. The second one contains encrypted tracks, and a player to play them. It makes some ripping tools have a harder time.
"I don't like guns.
But I'm against gun control precisely because I won't be a hypocrite who fights for the First Amendment and ignores that inconvenient Second one."
I was beginning to think that I was the only one that feels this way.
Personally, I think that large asssault rifles/fully automatic weapons etc. should be banned, however the second amendment is very very clear on this matter. If such things are to be regulated, it should be done with a constitutional amendment.
Actually, I took apart one of the XPIs - it just downloaded their IE spyware installer and ran it. It didn't actually do anything to mozilla.
I found it kind of funny.
Actually, it threads them. Click on the one you got, the rest of them should show up there.
This essentially requires you to have their permission to copy.
Actually, no it doesn't. Copyright law has a specific exemption for copies needed to run software.
Section 117, IIRC.
I don't know about you, but I use Daemon Tools to handle copy-protected software. Not only does it let me run even CD-Based software from the HD, it has the option to emulate many copy protection programs.
For example, with SafeDisc enabled, you need only install the software and run it once with emulation on. Daemon-tools will memorize which sectors are bad, and auto-skip them allowing you to burn a fully usable, copy protected version of the software in question.
You can also make a copy which would fail the copy protection check, then enable the emulation. The software will then pass, even if the CD is a copy.
http://www.allofmusic.com
Legality: They are licensed (and pay royalties to) ROMS, which under russian laws has the authority to license non-member music as well.
As for the U.S., importing of music not licensed here is allowed, provided it's for personal use (limited # of copies). The question is: "does this count as import". Well, ultimatly, it's up to the courts, but I would imagine it is, given that giving software (sequences of bits) to people outside the country still counts as export (and is subject to export controls).
Your google bomb won't work - sigs are only sent to logged in users, so search engines never see them.
I did - it was blank (I needed to clear general.useragent.override).
Doh!
When I try to load the Get The Facts site in IE, it loads just fine.
When I try to load it under Mozilla Firebird 0.7, I get redirected to http://www.microsoft.com/info/customerror.htm, with the error "We're sorry, we were unable to service your request. As an option, you may visit any of the pages below for information about Microsoft services and products."
Doesn't only showing the page to the people using your product kind of beat the purpose?
Just do a google-unfriendly redirect. That at least stops the PR-Spammers.