Just my two cents. I'd say off the top of my head that a good place to start is the difference in specifications between a consumer DVD reader and a consumer DVD recorder. Their standard approach used to be to identify where the consumer readers were more robust than the hardware that is used to write the media, and then exploit those differences.
For instance, say, for the sake of argument if a TV used for playback was more forgiving of a key portion of the signal that has been made artificially weaker than required by the recording side of a consumer VHS deck, the tape would theoretically play back, but the signal would be garbled when recorded. Assuming of course, your TV could handle the weaker signal.
This approach has been used to exploit the differences in the specifications between an audio CD player in a music deck, and the CDROM drive in a computer. Trouble is, music manufacturers started using parts built for computers because they were cheaper, and voila, the music deck is hosed.
After all, Macrovision is not in the business of preventing copying. They're in the business of selling copy-restriction technology to **AA fatheads who think they will improve their sales by crippling their products.
Absolutely. If they made the perfect copy protections scheme, they'd have to look for something else to do.
FWIW, the only thing more annoying than dealing with Macrovision's products is working for them. Believe me, I know. (It wasn't by choice, my company was aquired. And gutted.) Oh, and it's also annoying when your friends find out you work for MV, and start complaing about copy protection.
I had 2 Amiga 1000s, a SideCar, and a 2000. I loved those machines. I ported several orbital mechanics programs to them and they ran, as my father used to say, "like a scalded dog" compared to the 286s of the day. I held on to them forever, but sadly had to let them go for lack of space and time.
I think this is great... I don't understand all the dissing. If these people want to do this, then godspeed. Either they will sink without a trace, find a niche, or find parity with the current leaders. If they do the first two, why should anyone else give a damn!?!? If a miracle occurs and they become a playa, then we all benefit from the competition.
I grow roses. There are several rose varieties that are patented. I buy a patented rose. I take it home. Since I'm into roses, I know how to graft a branch from one rose bush to another. And since bushes of the "hybrid tea roses" variety are pretty much all done that way so that the pretty flowers have hardy root stock, it's not unknown.
Soooo.... I go home and start grafting away. Pretty soon I have ten new bushes. All of them with the pretty patented rose grafted onto my own root stock.
Most rose freaks, especially the ones who have patents or hope to, will say I've violated the patent, even though I haven't sold them. Since the wrapper the original bush came in expressly forbids what I've done, I guess the patent holder does too.
I think that's f***ing stupid.
SG-9
Parent post to these must be from some pointyhairedmanagement type, not a techgeek(like me). Wasn't it in "Revenge of the Nerds" they said "All jocks think about it sports. All nerds think about is sex."
Years ago, Infocom included a little "newsletter" in the boxes with Zork, Planetfall, etc. The thing contained updates on products in development, errata, etc. It was called "The Gnu-Yack Times" or the "The New Zork Times"... I can't remember which. The masthead also included the phrases "All the gnus wee feet leave prints" and I think "All the news that's printed to fit."
Anyway, The New York Times came down on them like a ton of bricks with a cease and desist order, saying the "publication" was "confusingly similar" to the newspaper. For a single sheet of paper included in a game box, that no one was making money off of.
So, Infocom changed the name of the the sheet by having a contest to rename the thing. One reader suggested they *really* piss 'em off and call it "The New York Times"... but I guess cooler heads prevailed and the sheet was changed to "The Status Line".
So this isn't new. Someone told me that NYT has to be vigilant so that some future real infringer couldn't point to the Infocom sheet as proof that the masthead had entered common language. Kimberly-Clark had that problem with the word "kleenex" and J&J did with "band-aid".
It's all BS of course. But these companies don't see it that way.
As a lawyer aquaintance of mine once quoted to me "Any idiot can retain counsel and seek redress of grievances before the court." Unfortunately, SG may have to expend time and money finding out if this is for real, formulating a reply, getting an attourney to check it, etc., etc. That's the hell of it.
Hey.... who you callin' Grandpa???
I'm 46 and I'm still writing code and working architecture issues. Started out in FORTRAN. On cards. One compile a day.
Now we've got all that we have. Some folks don't know how well off they are.:)
Oh... and emacs is better.
pd
[reposted: accidentally posted anonymously]
Long ago and far away, I was briefed during training... um... I mean... read somwhere... that both VLF and ELF propogation would actually be somehow enhanced by the EMPs of nuclear weapons. Not exactly sure how it worked, but supposedly there was something inherent in VLF/ELF propogation, and the systems were designed to take advantage of it. We... um... I mean... I've heard that the SAC missile combat crews... were told that the slow pace of the VLF messages would dramatically increase after a few weapons had gone off... and that would be notification of a sort in itself. Which was why we... I mean... I've heard that the combat crews considered that... it was considered the communications channel of last resort. If a Emergency War Order (EWO) message started coming through on the VLF reciever we... er... I mean... the missile combat crew knew that the sh#t had hit the fan. And the faster it came in, the more sh#t was flying around. The Navy had the ability to send VLF messages from their TACAMO airborne command posts, and the AF could send them from the LOOKING GLASS airborne command post or Air Force One or Air Force Two. In fact these planes could launch our... er... I mean... the missiles remotely if necessary. I probably shouldn't be giving away my knowledge of... um... I mean... spreading wild uncoroborated rumours about... the role VLF/ELF played/plays in the transmission of EWOs. In fact, you probably shouldn't believe a word I'm saying.;)
Slashdot Mirror
Just my two cents. I'd say off the top of my head that a good place to start is the difference in specifications between a consumer DVD reader and a consumer DVD recorder. Their standard approach used to be to identify where the consumer readers were more robust than the hardware that is used to write the media, and then exploit those differences.
For instance, say, for the sake of argument if a TV used for playback was more forgiving of a key portion of the signal that has been made artificially weaker than required by the recording side of a consumer VHS deck, the tape would theoretically play back, but the signal would be garbled when recorded. Assuming of course, your TV could handle the weaker signal.
This approach has been used to exploit the differences in the specifications between an audio CD player in a music deck, and the CDROM drive in a computer. Trouble is, music manufacturers started using parts built for computers because they were cheaper, and voila, the music deck is hosed.
After all, Macrovision is not in the business of preventing copying. They're in the business of selling copy-restriction technology to **AA fatheads who think they will improve their sales by crippling their products.
Absolutely. If they made the perfect copy protections scheme, they'd have to look for something else to do.
FWIW, the only thing more annoying than dealing with Macrovision's products is working for them. Believe me, I know. (It wasn't by choice, my company was aquired. And gutted.) Oh, and it's also annoying when your friends find out you work for MV, and start complaing about copy protection.
I had 2 Amiga 1000s, a SideCar, and a 2000. I loved those machines. I ported several orbital mechanics programs to them and they ran, as my father used to say, "like a scalded dog" compared to the 286s of the day. I held on to them forever, but sadly had to let them go for lack of space and time. I think this is great... I don't understand all the dissing. If these people want to do this, then godspeed. Either they will sink without a trace, find a niche, or find parity with the current leaders. If they do the first two, why should anyone else give a damn!?!? If a miracle occurs and they become a playa, then we all benefit from the competition.
I grow roses. There are several rose varieties that are patented. I buy a patented rose. I take it home. Since I'm into roses, I know how to graft a branch from one rose bush to another. And since bushes of the "hybrid tea roses" variety are pretty much all done that way so that the pretty flowers have hardy root stock, it's not unknown. Soooo.... I go home and start grafting away. Pretty soon I have ten new bushes. All of them with the pretty patented rose grafted onto my own root stock. Most rose freaks, especially the ones who have patents or hope to, will say I've violated the patent, even though I haven't sold them. Since the wrapper the original bush came in expressly forbids what I've done, I guess the patent holder does too. I think that's f***ing stupid. SG-9
Parent post to these must be from some pointyhairedmanagement type, not a techgeek(like me). Wasn't it in "Revenge of the Nerds" they said "All jocks think about it sports. All nerds think about is sex."
SG-9
Years ago, Infocom included a little "newsletter" in the boxes with Zork, Planetfall, etc. The thing contained updates on products in development, errata, etc. It was called "The Gnu-Yack Times" or the "The New Zork Times"... I can't remember which. The masthead also included the phrases "All the gnus wee feet leave prints" and I think "All the news that's printed to fit."
Anyway, The New York Times came down on them like a ton of bricks with a cease and desist order, saying the "publication" was "confusingly similar" to the newspaper. For a single sheet of paper included in a game box, that no one was making money off of.
So, Infocom changed the name of the the sheet by having a contest to rename the thing. One reader suggested they *really* piss 'em off and call it "The New York Times"... but I guess cooler heads prevailed and the sheet was changed to "The Status Line".
So this isn't new. Someone told me that NYT has to be vigilant so that some future real infringer couldn't point to the Infocom sheet as proof that the masthead had entered common language. Kimberly-Clark had that problem with the word "kleenex" and J&J did with "band-aid".
It's all BS of course. But these companies don't see it that way.
SG-9
As a lawyer aquaintance of mine once quoted to me "Any idiot can retain counsel and seek redress of grievances before the court." Unfortunately, SG may have to expend time and money finding out if this is for real, formulating a reply, getting an attourney to check it, etc., etc. That's the hell of it.
SG-9(unfortuneately, not connected with SG)
methinks thou dost protest too much. :)
> FANTASY: Myself and 5 Suicide Girls on a server room Too late. That's MY fantasy. Oh... and a package of really *thick* tie wraps. SG-9
Hey.... who you callin' Grandpa??? I'm 46 and I'm still writing code and working architecture issues. Started out in FORTRAN. On cards. One compile a day. Now we've got all that we have. Some folks don't know how well off they are. :)
Oh... and emacs is better.
pd
[reposted: accidentally posted anonymously] Long ago and far away, I was briefed during training... um... I mean... read somwhere... that both VLF and ELF propogation would actually be somehow enhanced by the EMPs of nuclear weapons. Not exactly sure how it worked, but supposedly there was something inherent in VLF/ELF propogation, and the systems were designed to take advantage of it. We... um... I mean... I've heard that the SAC missile combat crews... were told that the slow pace of the VLF messages would dramatically increase after a few weapons had gone off... and that would be notification of a sort in itself. Which was why we... I mean... I've heard that the combat crews considered that... it was considered the communications channel of last resort. If a Emergency War Order (EWO) message started coming through on the VLF reciever we... er... I mean... the missile combat crew knew that the sh#t had hit the fan. And the faster it came in, the more sh#t was flying around. The Navy had the ability to send VLF messages from their TACAMO airborne command posts, and the AF could send them from the LOOKING GLASS airborne command post or Air Force One or Air Force Two. In fact these planes could launch our... er... I mean... the missiles remotely if necessary. I probably shouldn't be giving away my knowledge of... um... I mean... spreading wild uncoroborated rumours about... the role VLF/ELF played/plays in the transmission of EWOs. In fact, you probably shouldn't believe a word I'm saying. ;)