If you do not upgrade and they revoke the key then your unupgraded version of PowerDVD will not play any movies published after revocation.
The point of key revocation is to put the cat back in the bag.
The game is not over. It's simply the MPAAs move. Will they actually use key revocation? I hope they do. I hope they keep using key revocation. Eventually they'll revoke a key that angers the wrong person. Say a sentator's player gets bricked.
Will key revocation even do anything? There's been two seperate successful attack vectors on AACS in a short time. They'll just keep breaking AACS until the MPAA realizes that it is impossible to keep something secure when you give people both the key and the lock protecting it.
Where's the article about the tree huggers funding pro global warming research? Since it's functionaly identical everyone should be up in arms about that too.
My understanding is that the drinking age was set by individual states so that they could get money from some highway construction bill in the late 70s or early 80s. I don't think/i it's set at the federal level, it's just that no states will turn down free* money. You're in the ball park.
It is illegal for the federal government to mandate a drinking age. It's something only the states can do. How ever the federal transportation system gives all states money every year. Since it's illegal to force a drinking age they made a law that prohibits you from geting highway money unless your drinking age is 21.
States are free to have any drinking age they want. However they would loose large amounts of money if they do.
A while back (6ish? years) there was a state legislator from Wisconsin that tried to get a law passed that closed this loophole and truely allow states to have any drinking age. Before the bill left commitee a bunch of drunk college students at a small WI school rioted after a house party was broken up. It made the front of CNN. The bill was never heard from again and no one has tried since.
youre talking to a certified economist who is essentially done with the relevant courses at a top 20 institution....
This is completely irrevelavant to the topic at hand. This statement accomplishes nothing more than you trying to stroke your epeen beack up to size after making a large public mistake.
who also happens to be on his 36th hour awake doing mind numbing research, papers, and studying for finals.
Based on the content of your post and responses you should consider stopping and getting some sleep. Work on the paper and finals will be more constructive when you are more coherent.
And what happens when someone doesn't follow the standard? When they put more juice into the card and use a stronger antenna?
A standard dictates how something should work but has nothing to do with how it does work. It is entirely possible to follow the standard to the letter and still have the card readable at over 1.5 m.
Shit we buried an ethernet cable to the building next door for a project. Yes that was the easiest way at the time. The run was much longer than the standard dictated. The cable worked.
FYI No citations in the article and it's flagged as not meeting quality standards.
Malaria is only spread by mosquitoes. Additionaly the transmition method was not proven until 1898 and not speculated on until 1881.
They may have died of malaria but it was not biological warfare waged by the government using technology that would not even be independently discovered for another 50 years. In a time when they didn't even know about 'germs'.
Most likely some bugs rode up in the bildge of a ship and ran rampant on a never exposed population.
The American Indians went through some horrible shit at the hands of the Europeans but biological warfare was not one of them.
...then given blankets with those illnesses to reduce their populations to a manageable level.
I have to object to this. It's sensational and not accurate.
Indian removals were from ~1830 to ~1850. (from a quick look at dates on the indian removal act and various wars) The germ theory of disease was formalized by Pasteur around 1865. Vaccination was around 1870.
I don't feel there was enough scientific knowledge around for this to have been an active genocide campaign. The blankets likely made them sick but it was not a deliberate campaign.
The thing is, this is starting to happen. None of the models can tell you with a high degree of certainty what the temperature in a given city will be on a given day, or the average on a given week, but on larger time and geographical scales, the models are starting to make valid predictions, and the very first few have been validated (well, you do have to wait a while to find out if the predicted global average temperature for 2006 matches reality, you know what I mean?)
No it's more a violation of the First Amendment. As a public school teacher he is a government employee. According to the first amendment the government has to be religion neutral. Thus the teacher cannot preach about religion in the class room.
Remember that in most cases the patent holder either won't licence their technology at all, will licence it for infeasable amounts of money
Can you back that up?
It's better to put the cost low and license like crazy. Look around work as ask yourself how rich you'd be if you had, literaly, a nickle for every motherboard? Now look out at the building around you. Now scale that up. Oh and you don't have to do jack shit for any of the money. Yeah not licensing is really smart.
The fact that Diebold is asking them to stop speaks volumes. If the documentary is libel then Diebold has legal options to force them to stop showing it. The fact that they aren't using the courts means Diebold can't prove the allegations are untrue.
It's no different than personal freedom -- you could try living in a society where the government doesn't intervene at all, but it would take a matter of days for gangs, organized crime, warlords, and other forces to strip your freedom away from you completely. That's why governments are created -- so that the limitations on freedom can be managed and minimized.
Actually governments are functionally analogous to 'gangs, organized crime, warlords, and other forces to strip your freedom away from you completely'. The only difference is one is legal and one is illegal.
The PS2 and PSP games can be purchased used without majorly impacting a boycott, but it's better if anything Sony sits on the shelf.
This is completely untrue. If console makers sell the consoles at a loss then how are they making money? Why would they bother? Sony gets paid for every game that sells. That's where they make the real money.
Do you remember Activision? Atari tried to prevent them from selling their games since they weren't paying Atari. That's why their cartriges had a different shape. They weren't official.
Moderm copy protection on consoles is only half there to prevent people from using pirate copies of games. The other reason is to prevent anyone from making a game and not paying Sony.
Rereading your post I see that it's factualy accurate. It seems my arguements were colored by an assumption you felt the DMCA is a good thing. Gomen.
Rereading all of this I do notice one problem for Google. If they put AdSense on the YouTube pages or prefix the videos with ads then they would potentialy be in violation of (B) and thus immediatly liable.
No you didn't get it right. You think there is a carrot. There is only a stick with this law. Please go read the law not some summary. When they receive the notice they have no legal obligation to take down the material. If they do not take down the material they can be found liable for copyright infringment. If they do take it down they are immune. Thus everyone takes it down. This is the stick.
They've tricked you into thinking this law helps ISPs. Go look at the uproar about this law when it was passed. The only group this law helps is people who want to outlaw fair use. This law allows copyright holders to bypass the courts and strong arm anyone they want. Before the DMCA the ISP had immunity since they are considered a common carrier. The DMCA basically removed common carrier protection. No proof of infringment needed. No court needed. All you have to do is send a form letter.
No that's not what the DMCA says. Please go read the DMCA. The RIAA or the MPAA can sue Google at any time if they want.
What you are thinking of is the strong arm section that has been spun as protection, The Online Copyright Infringment Liability Limitation Act aka DMCA 512 aka DMCA takedown. What the DMCA says is that if the copyright holder sends a letter claiming that something is infringment and Google takes it down then Google, at that point, is immune to lawsuit on that item.
In short. Take it down or we sue. If you do take it down we can't sue. This is a win/win/loose situation. The copyright holder gets the item taken down. The ISP is immune. The poster gets fucked.
Good! Maybe their recommendation system will start being useful. Currently it starts with nothing recommended and the more things you rate the more it recommends! How does this help me? Shouldn't it start by recommending all the movies and as I tell it what I like it narrows the number of recommendations.
Next time go back to the store and tell them the disk doesn't work and that you want a new copy. Much quicker and easier. Unless you mail ordered in which case I hope you saved a chunck of money to make up for the added hassle.
Slashdot Mirror
If you do not upgrade and they revoke the key then your unupgraded version of PowerDVD will not play any movies published after revocation.
The point of key revocation is to put the cat back in the bag.
The game is not over. It's simply the MPAAs move. Will they actually use key revocation? I hope they do. I hope they keep using key revocation. Eventually they'll revoke a key that angers the wrong person. Say a sentator's player gets bricked.
Will key revocation even do anything? There's been two seperate successful attack vectors on AACS in a short time. They'll just keep breaking AACS until the MPAA realizes that it is impossible to keep something secure when you give people both the key and the lock protecting it.
What about
(D) It had features that made it significantly better than VHS
(i) The seperation of a film into chapters coupled with the ability to the jump to said chapters.
(ii) Able to store multiple sound tracks and/or cuts of the film.
(iii) No rewinding.
Where's the article about the tree huggers funding pro global warming research? Since it's functionaly identical everyone should be up in arms about that too.
It is illegal for the federal government to mandate a drinking age. It's something only the states can do. How ever the federal transportation system gives all states money every year. Since it's illegal to force a drinking age they made a law that prohibits you from geting highway money unless your drinking age is 21.
States are free to have any drinking age they want. However they would loose large amounts of money if they do.
A while back (6ish? years) there was a state legislator from Wisconsin that tried to get a law passed that closed this loophole and truely allow states to have any drinking age. Before the bill left commitee a bunch of drunk college students at a small WI school rioted after a house party was broken up. It made the front of CNN. The bill was never heard from again and no one has tried since.
youre talking to a certified economist who is essentially done with the relevant courses at a top 20 institution....
This is completely irrevelavant to the topic at hand. This statement accomplishes nothing more than you trying to stroke your epeen beack up to size after making a large public mistake.
who also happens to be on his 36th hour awake doing mind numbing research, papers, and studying for finals.
Based on the content of your post and responses you should consider stopping and getting some sleep. Work on the paper and finals will be more constructive when you are more coherent.
And what happens when someone doesn't follow the standard? When they put more juice into the card and use a stronger antenna?
A standard dictates how something should work but has nothing to do with how it does work. It is entirely possible to follow the standard to the letter and still have the card readable at over 1.5 m.
Shit we buried an ethernet cable to the building next door for a project. Yes that was the easiest way at the time. The run was much longer than the standard dictated. The cable worked.
Misclicked and with new mod system your change is immediate without confirmation as under the old system.
FYI No citations in the article and it's flagged as not meeting quality standards.
Malaria is only spread by mosquitoes. Additionaly the transmition method was not proven until 1898 and not speculated on until 1881.
They may have died of malaria but it was not biological warfare waged by the government using technology that would not even be independently discovered for another 50 years. In a time when they didn't even know about 'germs'.
Most likely some bugs rode up in the bildge of a ship and ran rampant on a never exposed population.
The American Indians went through some horrible shit at the hands of the Europeans but biological warfare was not one of them.
...then given blankets with those illnesses to reduce their populations to a manageable level.
I have to object to this. It's sensational and not accurate.
Indian removals were from ~1830 to ~1850. (from a quick look at dates on the indian removal act and various wars) The germ theory of disease was formalized by Pasteur around 1865. Vaccination was around 1870.
I don't feel there was enough scientific knowledge around for this to have been an active genocide campaign. The blankets likely made them sick but it was not a deliberate campaign.
The thing is, this is starting to happen. None of the models can tell you with a high degree of certainty what the temperature in a given city will be on a given day, or the average on a given week, but on larger time and geographical scales, the models are starting to make valid predictions, and the very first few have been validated (well, you do have to wait a while to find out if the predicted global average temperature for 2006 matches reality, you know what I mean?)
Please provide evidence to back up this claim.
Both the dust and the el niño effect were likely caused by global warming.
Evidence please.
No it's more a violation of the First Amendment. As a public school teacher he is a government employee. According to the first amendment the government has to be religion neutral. Thus the teacher cannot preach about religion in the class room.
Remember that in most cases the patent holder either won't licence their technology at all, will licence it for infeasable amounts of money
Can you back that up?
It's better to put the cost low and license like crazy. Look around work as ask yourself how rich you'd be if you had, literaly, a nickle for every motherboard? Now look out at the building around you. Now scale that up. Oh and you don't have to do jack shit for any of the money. Yeah not licensing is really smart.
Don't see me complaining about WGA
Do people really have to deal with this? Just get an XP version with no activation. Mine's even legal.
The fact that Diebold is asking them to stop speaks volumes. If the documentary is libel then Diebold has legal options to force them to stop showing it. The fact that they aren't using the courts means Diebold can't prove the allegations are untrue.
It's no different than personal freedom -- you could try living in a society where the government doesn't intervene at all, but it would take a matter of days for gangs, organized crime, warlords, and other forces to strip your freedom away from you completely. That's why governments are created -- so that the limitations on freedom can be managed and minimized.
Actually governments are functionally analogous to 'gangs, organized crime, warlords, and other forces to strip your freedom away from you completely'. The only difference is one is legal and one is illegal.
My bad. Apparently reading is hard.
The PS2 and PSP games can be purchased used without majorly impacting a boycott, but it's better if anything Sony sits on the shelf.
This is completely untrue. If console makers sell the consoles at a loss then how are they making money? Why would they bother? Sony gets paid for every game that sells. That's where they make the real money.
Do you remember Activision? Atari tried to prevent them from selling their games since they weren't paying Atari. That's why their cartriges had a different shape. They weren't official.
Moderm copy protection on consoles is only half there to prevent people from using pirate copies of games. The other reason is to prevent anyone from making a game and not paying Sony.
Rereading your post I see that it's factualy accurate. It seems my arguements were colored by an assumption you felt the DMCA is a good thing. Gomen.
Rereading all of this I do notice one problem for Google. If they put AdSense on the YouTube pages or prefix the videos with ads then they would potentialy be in violation of (B) and thus immediatly liable.
No you didn't get it right. You think there is a carrot. There is only a stick with this law. Please go read the law not some summary. When they receive the notice they have no legal obligation to take down the material. If they do not take down the material they can be found liable for copyright infringment. If they do take it down they are immune. Thus everyone takes it down. This is the stick.
They've tricked you into thinking this law helps ISPs. Go look at the uproar about this law when it was passed. The only group this law helps is people who want to outlaw fair use. This law allows copyright holders to bypass the courts and strong arm anyone they want. Before the DMCA the ISP had immunity since they are considered a common carrier. The DMCA basically removed common carrier protection. No proof of infringment needed. No court needed. All you have to do is send a form letter.
No you're wrong. They are only immune if they take the requesting item down. If they leave it up they still have liability. Read the law.
You would prefer completely bypassing the courts and forcing an ISP to remove, with no proof of violation, what may be a fair usage?
What sense does that make?
This debate is off topic. I was mearly pointing out that the DMCA works differently than the GP claimed it did.
No that's not what the DMCA says. Please go read the DMCA. The RIAA or the MPAA can sue Google at any time if they want.
What you are thinking of is the strong arm section that has been spun as protection, The Online Copyright Infringment Liability Limitation Act aka DMCA 512 aka DMCA takedown. What the DMCA says is that if the copyright holder sends a letter claiming that something is infringment and Google takes it down then Google, at that point, is immune to lawsuit on that item.
In short. Take it down or we sue. If you do take it down we can't sue. This is a win/win/loose situation. The copyright holder gets the item taken down. The ISP is immune. The poster gets fucked.
Good! Maybe their recommendation system will start being useful. Currently it starts with nothing recommended and the more things you rate the more it recommends! How does this help me? Shouldn't it start by recommending all the movies and as I tell it what I like it narrows the number of recommendations.
Next time go back to the store and tell them the disk doesn't work and that you want a new copy. Much quicker and easier. Unless you mail ordered in which case I hope you saved a chunck of money to make up for the added hassle.