Now you've completely ruined your chance at ever getting your email back because, when an asshole pissed you off, you decided to be an even bigger asshole.
Who knows how this case will turn out. But based on experience, I totally disagree with that statement.
It has been my experience that when a company's customer service reps give you the run around, the absolute most effective way to halt the run-around process and get some relevant support is to be a total ass. I believe it is a modern version of "the squeaky wheel gets oiled."
My process is pretty simple, the customer service people get two chances to actually provide service. After the second non-helpful response, I start in with the vulgarities and go from there. That tactic almost always causes an immediate escalation to someone who will make an effort to fix my problem.
I think this is a terrible way to run a customer service group, because it encourages customers to treat the reps as poorly as possible. I suspect that the companies that run this way (almost all of them) are quite willing to sacrifice the mental/emotional health of their front-line support reps because there are plenty of people who won't assert themselves enough to break past the run-around, thus saving the company lots of money by avoiding the costs of supporting those who give up.
So, while I totally understand about how much it sucks to be a cog in the wheel of the machine, I think your blame is misplaced. The guilty party isn't the irate and abusive customer, it is the employer who sets up the system so as to cause customers to act abusively if they actually want a reasonable level of service.
Yet, on the other hand there are peripherals that do benefit from faster cpus. Like sound cards. You can get a card from Creative with a DSP built in, or a "dumb" card from most everyone else. Vista includes digital-room-correction (DRC) functionality which the Creative DSP is incapable of supporting, so is no better than the much cheaper "dumb" card. Similarly 3D sound, the last release of Doom works at least as well with the software 3D sound engine as it does with the Creative EAX-based engine (which Carmack only implemented after Creative waved a bunch of bucks his way).
Yep, plenty of HD-DVDs use VC-1. Sony's initial BD mastering software only supported MPEG2, but HD-DVD did VC-1 from the start. IIRC, Serenity, one of the first released HD-DVD's was encoded with VC-1.
Microsoft is already showing that Hi Def downloads that take advantage of more modern compression methods are possible on the higher end of the consumer bandwidth scale. The quality isn't quite as good as a $30 frisbee, but that's not going to swap most consumers. They can get the movie or TV show they want, when they want it, and for the price they want it.
Half-right. The MS xbox on-demand stuff uses the same compression as HD and BD - VC-1, there is no substantial difference in algorithm.
The difference is mainly in the resolution - HD and BD are both 1920x1080, while the xbox stuff is only 1280x720 which is roughly half the pixels. Sacrifice a little quality that most people won't readily notice anyway and you've got that 15GB 1080p movie down to a pretty decent looking 5GB 720p version. The pirates have been doing the same thing for years now - taking full 1080p hi-def "caps" (usually in mpeg2) and transcoding them to 720p (usually in h264) that fit on one 4.5GB DVD. They tend to look pretty good, significantly better than the DVD version of the same film.
Except the sorts of things that rely on the host PC for all/most of their processing (Winprinters/Winmodems), aren't limited by the host PC's CPU.
Network cards are the counter example. Things like checksum and protocol offload. There are others too.
If a peripheral is taxing the host CPU enough that upgrading the CPU will increase the performance on that peripheral, it's already taking up too much of the host CPUs time.
If that is true, then the GP's point is also moot - if the peripheral is NOT taxing the host CPU enough that upgrading the CPU will increase performance, then it can't be much of a significant determinant to parallelism either.
Nope. I would still rather have those cycles for computing things I want done rather than supporting some lame hardware vendor's attempt to save 5 cents on some bit of hardware.
Intellegence in peripherals should be expanding outwards rather than shrinking. The former aids parallelism and the latter sabotages it.
It is rarely so simple. Ask the question a different way and you will get a whole different attitude --
Do you want peripherals that get faster when you upgrade your computer or do you want ones that are stuck at the same performance level and will hold back your system performance after an upgrade, thus requiring that you throw them out and buy all new ones too?
Well, there's the PPC chip in the XBox 360, for one. That's a full TCPA system.
Pretty sure that's wrong. Infineon makes the TPM chip for the xbox 360. One of many mentions of the chip - no part number, but then I only spent 30 seconds googling for confirmation.
He also notes that some portions of TCPA are already in your CPU
While necessary to implement TCPA, those are not at all functions of the TPM.
That and cost saving is exactly why it'll be part of your CPU, if it isn't already.
Sounds like the party line. As long as the current TPM modules are supported, it won't matter if others eventually are integrated into CPUs - somebody could put a "TPM server" on the net and support thousands of users - maybe not all simultaneously, but the need for such a server would not be constant - only long enough to extract the protected information from the virtualized "trusted system."
The kernel in the VM has different state than the one loaded by the mainboard, including such things as being loaded at a different physical address. For this purpose, that makes it different.
I still don't see how that matters - for two reasons -
1) All those things you list can easily be handled by a VM designed to do so - the virtualized kernel doesn't know its actual physical address, it only knows the one in the VM, same thing for any other sort of state.
2) Who says the TPM has to be in a machine running a "trusted" OS in the first place, boot it non-trusted and just feed the TPM the appropriate inputs to make it think the system is booting. Failing that, run the TPM by itself - yank it off the motherboard and host it on your own PCB with an FPGA programmed to provide a full "VM" for the TPM itself.
The inputs include what kernel was loaded. If the kernel loaded by the mainboard does not match the kernel loaded by the VM, the publisher's software will be able to detect this situation.
I don't see how that makes a difference - in a VM the kernel is not modified, that's kind of the whole point of a VM, you do not need the cooperation of the hosted OS.
Sure, but the whole point is that you can't access the keys the "trusted" mainboard manufacturers encode into the hardware. You can program the emulator with any key you want, but it won't be one of the "trusted" keys. The keys are stored and used entirely within a single IC;
What is to stop a guy with a real TPM system and a virtual environment from just proxying any TPM requests/responses from the virtualized system to the real TPM module?
The TPM is like a black box right? Nobody can see inside it, all anyone can do - including a "trusted OS" is send it inputs and read the output. So, there should be no way for the virtualized OS to tell the difference between a proxyed TPM and a "directly connected" one.
So, now you've got a fully virtualized system that thinks it is running not-virtualized. Its memory, even its cpu registers, are ripe for harvesting supposedly protected information. If the system is going to depend on the TPM to do the actual decryption without exposing any keys, you still have easy access to the decrypted data that comes out of the TPM.
I don't think that many people who pay to download a movie really do so with the intent of putting it on a filesharing network. I mean, why the hell would you do that?
Because you like the movie and think as many people as possible should see it?
now danger mouse is half of the chart topping group gnarls barkley ("crazy" from summer 2006). that would have NEVER HAVE HAPPENED if the riaa had just ignored this guy. he would have had no career if the riaa hadn't pointed a spotlight at him (well, obviously he still had a chance at stardom on his own, the point is, it is now point of historical fact that it was riaa's actions that made this guy famous)
And now, according to riaaradar he has signed with Warner, a big-time member of the RIAA. So it would seem that the RIAA created their own star. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
I'm responding specifically to your use of the phrase "western propoganda", which is normally a code phrase that means you think Cuba is some misunderstood wonderful political system, if only the West would open its eyes.
So you made up a strawman and then tore it down wasting all of our time, how special. Don't even pretend that saying "normally a code phrase" makes it so.
Tech Liberation Front is also reporting that the raid was carried out with the help of a SWAT team. Cripes, what exactly did the lawyers tell the police was happening in there?
Its the result of too much misplaced money. Every little podunk town is getting federal funding for swat nowadays, so the big ones get proportionally more money. When you've got all those resources sitting around idle people start to question if the money was well spent in the first place. Thus pressure to justify their existence is great and every little situation that might possibly require it gets a SWAT deployment.
The right to copy and use ideas, information, and invention that comes our way freely without fraud or coercion. This right is just like the right to free religion, the right to free speech,
It isn't just "like" the right to free speech, it is the right of free speech. Little, if any, "speech" is original anyway, its just people copying the ideas of other people. Thus restrictions on certain kinds of copying are de facto restrictions on the freedom of expression.
Whether you agree that such restrictions are valid and beneficial is whole different matter.
2. During Attorney General Gonzales' previous congressional testimony on this topic, he was very careful and lawerly in asserting that his statements only applied to the program under discussion, that is the "Terrorist Surveillance Program". The clear implication is that there are other programs besides TSP which have not seen the light of day.
Yes, AT&T is still working on their, "Terrorist Friends and Family Surveillance Program." Spy on all the friends and family of a suspected terrorist that you want to for just one, low-cost, secret warrant!
Let me get this straight: You let a monkey run about throwing crap at everyone. Then, you have the opportunity to put the monkey back in his cage, but instead you let him back out so that he can clean up all the crap he threw? How's that logic working so far?
But, you do know that there are those who don't like to have their Gods mocked, and those are the most dangerous of Followers. Beware the religious zealot.
Are you saying that you are afraid of a bunch of gnuhadists?
Slashdot Mirror
Now you've completely ruined your chance at ever getting your email back because, when an asshole pissed you off, you decided to be an even bigger asshole.
Who knows how this case will turn out. But based on experience, I totally disagree with that statement.
It has been my experience that when a company's customer service reps give you the run around, the absolute most effective way to halt the run-around process and get some relevant support is to be a total ass. I believe it is a modern version of "the squeaky wheel gets oiled."
My process is pretty simple, the customer service people get two chances to actually provide service. After the second non-helpful response, I start in with the vulgarities and go from there. That tactic almost always causes an immediate escalation to someone who will make an effort to fix my problem.
I think this is a terrible way to run a customer service group, because it encourages customers to treat the reps as poorly as possible. I suspect that the companies that run this way (almost all of them) are quite willing to sacrifice the mental/emotional health of their front-line support reps because there are plenty of people who won't assert themselves enough to break past the run-around, thus saving the company lots of money by avoiding the costs of supporting those who give up.
So, while I totally understand about how much it sucks to be a cog in the wheel of the machine, I think your blame is misplaced. The guilty party isn't the irate and abusive customer, it is the employer who sets up the system so as to cause customers to act abusively if they actually want a reasonable level of service.
Yet, on the other hand there are peripherals that do benefit from faster cpus.
Like sound cards. You can get a card from Creative with a DSP built in, or a "dumb" card from most everyone else. Vista includes digital-room-correction (DRC) functionality which the Creative DSP is incapable of supporting, so is no better than the much cheaper "dumb" card. Similarly 3D sound, the last release of Doom works at least as well with the software 3D sound engine as it does with the Creative EAX-based engine (which Carmack only implemented after Creative waved a bunch of bucks his way).
Yep, plenty of HD-DVDs use VC-1. Sony's initial BD mastering software only supported MPEG2, but HD-DVD did VC-1 from the start. IIRC, Serenity, one of the first released HD-DVD's was encoded with VC-1.
Microsoft is already showing that Hi Def downloads that take advantage of more modern compression methods are possible on the higher end of the consumer bandwidth scale. The quality isn't quite as good as a $30 frisbee, but that's not going to swap most consumers. They can get the movie or TV show they want, when they want it, and for the price they want it.
Half-right. The MS xbox on-demand stuff uses the same compression as HD and BD - VC-1, there is no substantial difference in algorithm.
The difference is mainly in the resolution - HD and BD are both 1920x1080, while the xbox stuff is only 1280x720 which is roughly half the pixels. Sacrifice a little quality that most people won't readily notice anyway and you've got that 15GB 1080p movie down to a pretty decent looking 5GB 720p version. The pirates have been doing the same thing for years now - taking full 1080p hi-def "caps" (usually in mpeg2) and transcoding them to 720p (usually in h264) that fit on one 4.5GB DVD. They tend to look pretty good, significantly better than the DVD version of the same film.
Except the sorts of things that rely on the host PC for all/most of their processing (Winprinters/Winmodems), aren't limited by the host PC's CPU.
Network cards are the counter example. Things like checksum and protocol offload. There are others too.
If a peripheral is taxing the host CPU enough that upgrading the CPU will increase the performance on that peripheral, it's already taking up too much of the host CPUs time.
If that is true, then the GP's point is also moot - if the peripheral is NOT taxing the host CPU enough that upgrading the CPU will increase performance, then it can't be much of a significant determinant to parallelism either.
Do you want peripherals that get faster when you upgrade your computer or do you want ones that are stuck at the same performance level and will hold back your system performance after an upgrade, thus requiring that you throw them out and buy all new ones too?
Well, there's the PPC chip in the XBox 360, for one. That's a full TCPA system.
Pretty sure that's wrong. Infineon makes the TPM chip for the xbox 360.
One of many mentions of the chip - no part number, but then I only spent 30 seconds googling for confirmation.
He also notes that some portions of TCPA are already in your CPU
While necessary to implement TCPA, those are not at all functions of the TPM.
That and cost saving is exactly why it'll be part of your CPU, if it isn't already.
Sounds like the party line. As long as the current TPM modules are supported, it won't matter if others eventually are integrated into CPUs - somebody could put a "TPM server" on the net and support thousands of users - maybe not all simultaneously, but the need for such a server would not be constant - only long enough to extract the protected information from the virtualized "trusted system."
The TPM is built into the CPU
Pretty sure that's not true. Feel free to identify such a CPU with specs to prove it.
The kernel in the VM has different state than the one loaded by the mainboard, including such things as being loaded at a different physical address. For this purpose, that makes it different.
I still don't see how that matters - for two reasons -
1) All those things you list can easily be handled by a VM designed to do so - the virtualized kernel doesn't know its actual physical address, it only knows the one in the VM, same thing for any other sort of state.
2) Who says the TPM has to be in a machine running a "trusted" OS in the first place, boot it non-trusted and just feed the TPM the appropriate inputs to make it think the system is booting. Failing that, run the TPM by itself - yank it off the motherboard and host it on your own PCB with an FPGA programmed to provide a full "VM" for the TPM itself.
Lol! Don't you know that rights, like the presumption of innocence, are only for American citizens?
The inputs include what kernel was loaded. If the kernel loaded by the mainboard does not match the kernel loaded by the VM, the publisher's software will be able to detect this situation.
I don't see how that makes a difference - in a VM the kernel is not modified, that's kind of the whole point of a VM, you do not need the cooperation of the hosted OS.
Sure, but the whole point is that you can't access the keys the "trusted" mainboard manufacturers encode into the hardware. You can program the emulator with any key you want, but it won't be one of the "trusted" keys. The keys are stored and used entirely within a single IC;
What is to stop a guy with a real TPM system and a virtual environment from just proxying any TPM requests/responses from the virtualized system to the real TPM module?
The TPM is like a black box right? Nobody can see inside it, all anyone can do - including a "trusted OS" is send it inputs and read the output. So, there should be no way for the virtualized OS to tell the difference between a proxyed TPM and a "directly connected" one.
So, now you've got a fully virtualized system that thinks it is running not-virtualized. Its memory, even its cpu registers, are ripe for harvesting supposedly protected information. If the system is going to depend on the TPM to do the actual decryption without exposing any keys, you still have easy access to the decrypted data that comes out of the TPM.
"This information was submitted to Google by Firefox users with the browser's internal antiphishing toolbar."
What internal antiphishing toolbar? I use firefox 2.0 and the only toolbars listed on View->Toolbars are Navigation and Bookmarks.
I don't think that many people who pay to download a movie really do so with the intent of putting it on a filesharing network. I mean, why the hell would you do that?
Because you like the movie and think as many people as possible should see it?
now danger mouse is half of the chart topping group gnarls barkley ("crazy" from summer 2006). that would have NEVER HAVE HAPPENED if the riaa had just ignored this guy. he would have had no career if the riaa hadn't pointed a spotlight at him (well, obviously he still had a chance at stardom on his own, the point is, it is now point of historical fact that it was riaa's actions that made this guy famous)
And now, according to riaaradar he has signed with Warner, a big-time member of the RIAA. So it would seem that the RIAA created their own star. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
I'm responding specifically to your use of the phrase "western propoganda", which is normally a code phrase that means you think Cuba is some misunderstood wonderful political system, if only the West would open its eyes.
So you made up a strawman and then tore it down wasting all of our time, how special.
Don't even pretend that saying "normally a code phrase" makes it so.
Tech Liberation Front is also reporting that the raid was carried out with the help of a SWAT team. Cripes, what exactly did the lawyers tell the police was happening in there?
Its the result of too much misplaced money. Every little podunk town is getting federal funding for swat nowadays, so the big ones get proportionally more money. When you've got all those resources sitting around idle people start to question if the money was well spent in the first place. Thus pressure to justify their existence is great and every little situation that might possibly require it gets a SWAT deployment.
Is that you Dexter?
The right to copy and use ideas, information, and invention that comes our way freely without fraud or coercion. This right is just like the right to free religion, the right to free speech,
It isn't just "like" the right to free speech, it is the right of free speech.
Little, if any, "speech" is original anyway, its just people copying the ideas of other people. Thus restrictions on certain kinds of copying are de facto restrictions on the freedom of expression.
Whether you agree that such restrictions are valid and beneficial is whole different matter.
2. During Attorney General Gonzales' previous congressional testimony on this topic, he was very careful and lawerly in asserting that his statements only applied to the program under discussion, that is the "Terrorist Surveillance Program". The clear implication is that there are other programs besides TSP which have not seen the light of day.
Yes, AT&T is still working on their, "Terrorist Friends and Family Surveillance Program." Spy on all the friends and family of a suspected terrorist that you want to for just one, low-cost, secret warrant!
Why are you posting red herrings?
How about actually disputing that Cuba does indeed conduct cutting edge biotech development?
Or are you just determined to prove my point about brain-washing by your own example?
Let me get this straight: You let a monkey run about throwing crap at everyone. Then, you have the opportunity to put the monkey back in his cage, but instead you let him back out so that he can clean up all the crap he threw? How's that logic working so far?
Not so bad, actually.
the words Cuba and cutting edge just don't go together.
Only if you've been brainwashed by western propaganda.
a more likely case would be two very well paid (or paid off) programmers
Very well paid or very well dead.
But, you do know that there are those who don't like to have their Gods mocked, and those are the most dangerous of Followers. Beware the religious zealot.
Are you saying that you are afraid of a bunch of gnuhadists?