thank you for the humor. I haven't been reminded of this travesty (travesty because some people take that comic seriously) in some time. Because I'm afraid you might be one of those people, I'll "feed the troll" with some counter humor:
I believe that's the point. you can get stuff faster with microtransactions, but unlike many other games, you don't have to. You paid 35 points to have that armor 2 dungeons earlier than you otherwise would have...
You mean like some stupid person decides to order a ton of smoke detectors, remove all the Americium, and build himself a reactor in his back yard. That would NEVER happen. Well, only with a stupid person. Never an Eagle scout. Never ever.
I think they're suggesting that other people copied parts of their patented hardware as well. last I checked they weren't pursuing software patent infringement. Implementing something in hardware is almost always better performing than in software. Sure, you could do it in software, but the hardware implementation they came up with was pretty slick, and it enabled the simultaneous view/record thing in hardware.
BUT, other companies are still pedaling their hardware that infringes on Tivo's (still valid) hardware patents. Tivo enabled certain things that everyone was chasing after for years. should they be able to profit by copying? this is what the patent system was supposed to do, reward innovators with a temporary monopoly, and grant legal leverage to support that temporary monopoly.
this is the patent system working as it should, for hardware inventions that have been reduced to practice.
that's fine if the ideal dynamic utilization has zero overhead. So if I need it for something, I get it back without delay. In practice, if it adds anything to my system's ability to allocate whatever memory I need to open something else, then it sucks.
BUT... thermal paste with particulate filler is some fraction of the numbers above, as the fillers have k in the low single digits, and too much particulate would keep it from applying/spreading/adhering correctly
the key is the degree of solids loading to filler. the silver particle TIMs have solids thermal conductivities of 200-400W/m-K depending on what they have in them, but the filler is usually single digit or less. The effective thermal conductivity will depend on that loading and how well the particles 'bridge' from surface to surface. In addition, you have to fill all the microvoids well (which is why you still need a certain amount of viscous binder) or you'll get little air gap insulators. AND, there's always the question of cycling behavior, as most pastes will experience a degree of "thermal settling" over a break-in period (either good or bad) and pump-out over longer times (usually bad). All of this will depend on the thermal AND mechanical properties of the binder and solids.
Anybody could load a binder with carbon and get a high k material. Getting one that applies well, adheres well, stays good over time, etc., is where the money's at. So far, arctic silver has the lead (and name recognition) with effective material thermal k around 12W/mK or so I think. Diamond/carbon loading could be good, but much more analysis is required to be conclusive. Heck, DARPA's kicking millions into a thermal interface material program. I guarantee you that someone's putting some form of carbon in there. Here's hoping for some commercial fallout in the near term. http://www.darpa.mil/MTO/programs/nti/index.html
wait... now I'm confused. A July 10th blog entry on the Sunlight foundation website says:
"Jim Harper, Webmaster at WashingtonWatch.com, can use our help this weekend... Sunlight has provided partial support for Jimâ(TM)s project...Just like Sunlightâ(TM)s Transparency Corp, Jim is asking for volunteers to make government transparency a reality."
so... they're different, but they support each other. Are they sharing data?
wasn't there just a frontpage on another similar effort? WashingtonWatch.com offering a Kindle to the user with the most Appropriation entries to their app, tied to a google map. It's like linux distros, which one do I use and how do we avoid fracturing the support base
I have a friend who did their 100+ page thesis in FrameMaker. Swears by it for any serious technical document. Didn't have one layout problem the whole time, unlike myself and countless others (I know 4 personally) who spent days just getting Word to behave. (I probably got the best at preempting most of the problems by using styles, links, references and indices more or less correctly, but still had to spend way too much time dealing with the problem of moving a block of text from one part of the document to the other, then hunting for the magical new location of all of my figures.)
There are a number of SPICE frontends. Right now I'm using the free LTSpice from Linear Technology. It's a professional quality code that the company releases for free since their main product line is actualy electronic components. The software comes with a full library of LT components of course. BUT, it's windows only. There's a Yahoo user group that may be able to answer questions about how well it runs under VMWare or Parallels, It supposedly runs well under Wine. (Winehq.org says "Works well with wine"). So that could take care of Linux and Windows users, but no idea with Mac. I know Mac users are whiny enough, but don't they have a Wine equivalent yet?
Every professional conference I've been do has provided an attendees list as part of the welcome kit (including the program, CD with papers/presentations, etc.). I get crap from vendors every once in a while. But not too much. Was this McAffee leaked information more than just contact info?
"the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work" does not equate to "derives commercial profit or benefit from the copy". Increased availability can diminish demand, which affects the market. It could increase demand in often overclaimed cases of altruistic downloaders just sampling the songs to see if they want to buy it later. Or, bands as a whole could see some increased net demand due to the marketing aspect of wider dissemination of their music.
But, the most obvious and immediate effect is that of dilution in the market place reducing demand. There is no reliable, quantifiable aspect of that effect which leaves the respectable corporate stiffs free to make their own estimates and claims, as they do.
hmmm... well, you've put the painting on the outside of the building. You've hung a sign up next to the painting saying, "come and make copies of this painting." Now, what you're missing from your analogy is this: you must actually be standing there helping people make the copy. Why? well, because you are providing part of the copying mechanism. In filesharing you put up a file, they request the file (or part thereof), and you dutifully send it to them. They initiate a request to your previous offer, and you respond to their request by sending them a copy of the file. Sure, it may be a passive automated process, but you set it up to behave in that automated fashion. So instead of you helping make the copies, you fashioned a robot to stand their helping make the copies while you're away. You still assisted in making the copy. maybe you put up a sign saying 'come and make copies, but I'm trusting you to only do so if you are legally permitted to do so," but make no effort to verify this permission. THEN, things finally get a bit dubious, depending on how fair use is interpreted, how license to copy/backup for noncommercial use is interpreted, etc.
Yes, I still agree that liability should require proof of the illegal event occurring, and civil liability should be tied to the number of illegal actions that can be proven to have occurred from a system under my responsibility. Note I did not say it needs to be tied to actions I committed to be liable. In a civil case, even if they couldn't prove me directly liable for copyright infringement (which should require evidence of the acting person), I suspect I could be found liable for negligence in allowing someone to use my system for illegal activity. BUT, in any case, demonstration of evidence of the illegal transfer should be required.
last I checked, copyright involved the right to make and distribute copies of a creative work. So, making copies and distributing them around the various file sharing networks seems like a pretty clear case of copyright infringement. Whether or not there are certain cases in which the infringement is defensible is a separate issue. But, even if defensible, it would still be infringement.
no. the point of working in the music industry (not just creating music, but working in the industry) is to sell your music in some form for a profit, or to enable that to happen. Academics (esp. scienctists) are supposed to further the body of knowledge in the field by building upon the basis set by previous contributors to the field. They are paid to provide a service (the research) not to provide content (the papers) although contribution is often rated by the content generated. They generally do not derive income directly from the content, and they arguably receive more of a benefit from free distribution of that content (knowledge upon which others can build, adding legitimacy to the base work) than they get from limited, copyright controlled distribution (arguable in that the publication process can add value, weed out the weak, etc.)
So, that is different from the current state of the music industry. Copyright is meant to protect profits for a time to add incentive to create. That incentive is not as necessary for the creator in the academic world, so maybe it shouldn't exist.
This is all separate from government supported / derived/funded research, which should be immediately available in the condition the researchers initially compiled it into before publisher assistance was provided. Sure, someone's gotta pay for professional editorial services, but I shouldn't have to pay for the data twice if that's all I want.
actually, how are they tuning porn searches? depending on your desired search results, the wrong query, or the system interpreting your query wrong could bring up some truly undesired stuff.
What's the overhead like on getting it back when I did want to use it? The 'your PC's memory should always be full, otherwise you're wasting it" argument only works if there is no memory management overhead. If there's no wait time for me to move memory content to the swap so that I can open the big photo/spreadsheet/movie/simulation/etc that actually needs that memory, then there's no problem. If I need that memory, I want it without delay. If default behavior adds delay as a norm, that's a problem. Thus, it makes sense to maintain some free ram under normal operations to account for the overhead involved in freeing up ram that I didn't explicitly ask to be occupied.
Pump and Dump refers to stock manipulation. I.e., the "invest in pink sheets company with stock ticker XYZ.BK before you miss the deal of a lifetime!" junk faxes and emails. Here, it's just fraud if deliberate and incompetence/foolishness if not.
Every agency right now is being asked to do more with less, or at least do the same with less. (even the DoD). When I first proposed a few pieces of FOSS a couple years ago (a PDF creator instead of Adobe product, Octave unless Matlab really needed, Paint.net vs. photoshop, etc.) I got the response "We don't do freeware here." As he said it I envisioned visions (yes, I know) of 3-1/2" floppies full of shareware and viruses being tossed about between friends 15 years ago. Promoting FOSS to the government should be a good thing. Convincing government that supporting development of FOSS would be a better thing (e.g., if I could spend up to 5% of my time helping tweak Elmer or Salome or Octave)
There's a public benefit to generating quality free software. It becomes an established resource for others to use without spending additional capital, thus allowing capital to be spent on other things better focused on their bottom line. Will a few commercial entities suffer? Maybe. Probably. Shouldn't be my concern. It's the commercial sector's job to adapt to the market, not my job to maintain the status quo.
well, that raises one other question: since there are two distinct and incompatible phone networks in the US (CMDA and GSM) would phone makers make versions that work on both networks? All of a sudden all of these phones would need twice the hardware component count internally so they could hook up with whichever carrier you're currently on. If not, would carriers make two separate lines on phones, one for each network? Would they want to put up with the customer service hassle of telling Aunt May that she bought the GSM version of the LG V3231 and not the CDMA version?
Slashdot Mirror
thank you for the humor. I haven't been reminded of this travesty (travesty because some people take that comic seriously) in some time. Because I'm afraid you might be one of those people, I'll "feed the troll" with some counter humor:
MST3K analysis of Dark Dungeons:
http://www.humpin.org/mst3kdd/
A less humorous, but wonderfully sarcastic "Dark Dungeons" point-by-point response:
http://www.theescapist.com/darkdungeons.htm
I believe that's the point. you can get stuff faster with microtransactions, but unlike many other games, you don't have to. You paid 35 points to have that armor 2 dungeons earlier than you otherwise would have...
You mean like some stupid person decides to order a ton of smoke detectors, remove all the Americium, and build himself a reactor in his back yard. That would NEVER happen. Well, only with a stupid person. Never an Eagle scout. Never ever.
I think they're suggesting that other people copied parts of their patented hardware as well. last I checked they weren't pursuing software patent infringement. Implementing something in hardware is almost always better performing than in software. Sure, you could do it in software, but the hardware implementation they came up with was pretty slick, and it enabled the simultaneous view/record thing in hardware.
BUT, other companies are still pedaling their hardware that infringes on Tivo's (still valid) hardware patents. Tivo enabled certain things that everyone was chasing after for years. should they be able to profit by copying? this is what the patent system was supposed to do, reward innovators with a temporary monopoly, and grant legal leverage to support that temporary monopoly.
this is the patent system working as it should, for hardware inventions that have been reduced to practice.
"will use dynamically"
that's fine if the ideal dynamic utilization has zero overhead. So if I need it for something, I get it back without delay. In practice, if it adds anything to my system's ability to allocate whatever memory I need to open something else, then it sucks.
you're talking about material thermal conductivity differences:
diamond (carbon): k=900 - 2320 W/mK
penny (copper) k ~ 400W/mK
penny (97.5 percent zinc and 2.5 percent copper) k_zinc ~ 120W/mK
So, there you have it. science still works.
BUT... thermal paste with particulate filler is some fraction of the numbers above, as the fillers have k in the low single digits, and too much particulate would keep it from applying/spreading/adhering correctly
the key is the degree of solids loading to filler. the silver particle TIMs have solids thermal conductivities of 200-400W/m-K depending on what they have in them, but the filler is usually single digit or less. The effective thermal conductivity will depend on that loading and how well the particles 'bridge' from surface to surface. In addition, you have to fill all the microvoids well (which is why you still need a certain amount of viscous binder) or you'll get little air gap insulators. AND, there's always the question of cycling behavior, as most pastes will experience a degree of "thermal settling" over a break-in period (either good or bad) and pump-out over longer times (usually bad). All of this will depend on the thermal AND mechanical properties of the binder and solids.
Anybody could load a binder with carbon and get a high k material. Getting one that applies well, adheres well, stays good over time, etc., is where the money's at. So far, arctic silver has the lead (and name recognition) with effective material thermal k around 12W/mK or so I think. Diamond/carbon loading could be good, but much more analysis is required to be conclusive. Heck, DARPA's kicking millions into a thermal interface material program. I guarantee you that someone's putting some form of carbon in there. Here's hoping for some commercial fallout in the near term. http://www.darpa.mil/MTO/programs/nti/index.html
don't ping and traceroot do a resolve before giving you your data? does this screw with that?
wait... now I'm confused. A July 10th blog entry on the Sunlight foundation website says:
"Jim Harper, Webmaster at WashingtonWatch.com, can use our help this weekend... Sunlight has provided partial support for Jimâ(TM)s project...Just like Sunlightâ(TM)s Transparency Corp, Jim is asking for volunteers to make government transparency a reality."
so... they're different, but they support each other. Are they sharing data?
wasn't there just a frontpage on another similar effort? WashingtonWatch.com offering a Kindle to the user with the most Appropriation entries to their app, tied to a google map. It's like linux distros, which one do I use and how do we avoid fracturing the support base
I have a friend who did their 100+ page thesis in FrameMaker. Swears by it for any serious technical document. Didn't have one layout problem the whole time, unlike myself and countless others (I know 4 personally) who spent days just getting Word to behave. (I probably got the best at preempting most of the problems by using styles, links, references and indices more or less correctly, but still had to spend way too much time dealing with the problem of moving a block of text from one part of the document to the other, then hunting for the magical new location of all of my figures.)
I'm now using TeXnicCenter/MiKTeX
There are a number of SPICE frontends. Right now I'm using the free LTSpice from Linear Technology. It's a professional quality code that the company releases for free since their main product line is actualy electronic components. The software comes with a full library of LT components of course. BUT, it's windows only. There's a Yahoo user group that may be able to answer questions about how well it runs under VMWare or Parallels, It supposedly runs well under Wine. (Winehq.org says "Works well with wine"). So that could take care of Linux and Windows users, but no idea with Mac. I know Mac users are whiny enough, but don't they have a Wine equivalent yet?
Every professional conference I've been do has provided an attendees list as part of the welcome kit (including the program, CD with papers/presentations, etc.). I get crap from vendors every once in a while. But not too much. Was this McAffee leaked information more than just contact info?
very good.
"the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work" does not equate to "derives commercial profit or benefit from the copy". Increased availability can diminish demand, which affects the market. It could increase demand in often overclaimed cases of altruistic downloaders just sampling the songs to see if they want to buy it later. Or, bands as a whole could see some increased net demand due to the marketing aspect of wider dissemination of their music.
But, the most obvious and immediate effect is that of dilution in the market place reducing demand. There is no reliable, quantifiable aspect of that effect which leaves the respectable corporate stiffs free to make their own estimates and claims, as they do.
hmmm... well, you've put the painting on the outside of the building. You've hung a sign up next to the painting saying, "come and make copies of this painting." Now, what you're missing from your analogy is this: you must actually be standing there helping people make the copy. Why? well, because you are providing part of the copying mechanism. In filesharing you put up a file, they request the file (or part thereof), and you dutifully send it to them. They initiate a request to your previous offer, and you respond to their request by sending them a copy of the file. Sure, it may be a passive automated process, but you set it up to behave in that automated fashion. So instead of you helping make the copies, you fashioned a robot to stand their helping make the copies while you're away. You still assisted in making the copy. maybe you put up a sign saying 'come and make copies, but I'm trusting you to only do so if you are legally permitted to do so," but make no effort to verify this permission. THEN, things finally get a bit dubious, depending on how fair use is interpreted, how license to copy/backup for noncommercial use is interpreted, etc.
Yes, I still agree that liability should require proof of the illegal event occurring, and civil liability should be tied to the number of illegal actions that can be proven to have occurred from a system under my responsibility. Note I did not say it needs to be tied to actions I committed to be liable. In a civil case, even if they couldn't prove me directly liable for copyright infringement (which should require evidence of the acting person), I suspect I could be found liable for negligence in allowing someone to use my system for illegal activity. BUT, in any case, demonstration of evidence of the illegal transfer should be required.
last I checked, copyright involved the right to make and distribute copies of a creative work. So, making copies and distributing them around the various file sharing networks seems like a pretty clear case of copyright infringement. Whether or not there are certain cases in which the infringement is defensible is a separate issue. But, even if defensible, it would still be infringement.
no. the point of working in the music industry (not just creating music, but working in the industry) is to sell your music in some form for a profit, or to enable that to happen. Academics (esp. scienctists) are supposed to further the body of knowledge in the field by building upon the basis set by previous contributors to the field. They are paid to provide a service (the research) not to provide content (the papers) although contribution is often rated by the content generated. They generally do not derive income directly from the content, and they arguably receive more of a benefit from free distribution of that content (knowledge upon which others can build, adding legitimacy to the base work) than they get from limited, copyright controlled distribution (arguable in that the publication process can add value, weed out the weak, etc.)
So, that is different from the current state of the music industry. Copyright is meant to protect profits for a time to add incentive to create. That incentive is not as necessary for the creator in the academic world, so maybe it shouldn't exist.
This is all separate from government supported / derived /funded research, which should be immediately available in the condition the researchers initially compiled it into before publisher assistance was provided. Sure, someone's gotta pay for professional editorial services, but I shouldn't have to pay for the data twice if that's all I want.
yeah, well the jerk store called. they're running out of you.
actually, how are they tuning porn searches? depending on your desired search results, the wrong query, or the system interpreting your query wrong could bring up some truly undesired stuff.
What's the overhead like on getting it back when I did want to use it? The 'your PC's memory should always be full, otherwise you're wasting it" argument only works if there is no memory management overhead. If there's no wait time for me to move memory content to the swap so that I can open the big photo/spreadsheet/movie/simulation/etc that actually needs that memory, then there's no problem. If I need that memory, I want it without delay. If default behavior adds delay as a norm, that's a problem. Thus, it makes sense to maintain some free ram under normal operations to account for the overhead involved in freeing up ram that I didn't explicitly ask to be occupied.
but does it come with Ms. Fox?
Pump and Dump refers to stock manipulation. I.e., the "invest in pink sheets company with stock ticker XYZ.BK before you miss the deal of a lifetime!" junk faxes and emails. Here, it's just fraud if deliberate and incompetence/foolishness if not.
Every agency right now is being asked to do more with less, or at least do the same with less. (even the DoD). When I first proposed a few pieces of FOSS a couple years ago (a PDF creator instead of Adobe product, Octave unless Matlab really needed, Paint.net vs. photoshop, etc.) I got the response "We don't do freeware here." As he said it I envisioned visions (yes, I know) of 3-1/2" floppies full of shareware and viruses being tossed about between friends 15 years ago. Promoting FOSS to the government should be a good thing. Convincing government that supporting development of FOSS would be a better thing (e.g., if I could spend up to 5% of my time helping tweak Elmer or Salome or Octave)
There's a public benefit to generating quality free software. It becomes an established resource for others to use without spending additional capital, thus allowing capital to be spent on other things better focused on their bottom line. Will a few commercial entities suffer? Maybe. Probably. Shouldn't be my concern. It's the commercial sector's job to adapt to the market, not my job to maintain the status quo.
well, that raises one other question: since there are two distinct and incompatible phone networks in the US (CMDA and GSM) would phone makers make versions that work on both networks? All of a sudden all of these phones would need twice the hardware component count internally so they could hook up with whichever carrier you're currently on. If not, would carriers make two separate lines on phones, one for each network? Would they want to put up with the customer service hassle of telling Aunt May that she bought the GSM version of the LG V3231 and not the CDMA version?