Its a pity then that we lost as many soldiers in GW1 to US attacks as we did to the 'enemy'. Laser guidance if fine if you can point it in the right direction. Cheers mate.
They are quasi-legal in so much as the US (and only the US!) thinks that some of the contents are illegal. For the rest of us, there is no problem. Ubuntu doesn't have to solve the problems of a specific nation, you can do that yourselves.
When a new model of car is released onto the market, will you have a problem because it has a name that you do not recognise? No, I suspect that you will cope, its just that you can't be bothered when it comes to linux. That is not a linux problem.
Re:Why not make an "Uncrippled for non-US" edition
on
Dell Linux Details
·
· Score: 1
It wasn't intended as 'obnoxious European holier-than-thou-ism'.
It was simply pointing out that there are only a few countries (perhaps even only one) where DVD playback is a problem. Installing libdvdcss2 and w32codecs takes less than 30 seconds and is not illegal where I live. They perhaps aren't installed by default in the same way that apache2, tor or blender are not installed - not everyone will want it.
Will Dell Europe be able to sell computers with linux installed and DVD playback already enabled? If not, why not?
I am surprised that the raids were conducted by Microsoft - why not the appropriate law enforcement agency?
What gives Microsoft the legal right to 'conduct raids'? They can perhaps visit the dealers (which they did in this case by introducing a dummy customer) and threaten to take legal action if they, the dealers, do not stop their illegal activities. However, they cannot conduct raids, demand payments or issue fines. That is the function of law enforcement and the judiciary.
The language in which the OP is written suggests that it is the product of 'spin' and is not an accurate version of events. There was no 'raid'.
No, I don't agree. Most people would find what you describe as objectionable and would therefore practice self-censorship. The problem however is when someone else is doing the censoring and then you might not agree as to what is acceptable and what is not. While I do not think that your examples would be difficult to find some consensus of agreement, what would happen if someone with extreme views had the responsibility for deciding what is decent? I wouldn't want some religious zealot telling me what I can view, nor would the majority of the US accept, say, a muslim cleric deciding what kind of images are deemed 'suitable' for hosting on the video site. Family videos? Not acceptable if the subject includes a female and the hair is being displayed or anything more than the hands or feet in view, for example? No, censorship will always be wrong in someone's opinion.
Firstly, if you feel so strongly, why post as AC? Secondly, the URL works correctly and points to the appropriate information. What exactly is your complaint with it? Thirdly, you might wish to have Zonk removed from the 'board of editors' but what do you hope to gain by 'banning his account'? Anyone can read/., and even AC's have the opportunity to post. Preventing AC's from posting would lead to a much more significant improvement in the quality of posts, or at least that is my opinion.
I find this entire thread quite alarming. There is often criticism of the UK's desire to have cameras located in places where they can observe the public and this fact is, rightly in my opinion, highlighted as an example of how the UK is becoming a totalitarian state. Yet in this thread there is widespread concern regarding how your Government can track your every move without using cameras. How is this better?
Worst still, in this and many other threads, the likelihood of someone being anally raped whilst incarcerated in prison is stated as though it is almost a certainty. What kind of Government can lock people up but take no responsibility for their physical wellbeing whilst they are unable to do it for themselves? I hope that I never read of the US criticising some other country's human rights record when this this sort of behaviour appears to not only be tolerated but accepted as part of the punishment.
Land of the free......? You would have more rights in Iran, Iraq or many of the other countries - yes, even the UK - than you appear to have at home.
In which case, you didn't install the software correctly. My installation asked me what screen resolutions I wanted to work at, and I can select any of them.
Perhaps in the US, although I am not convinced, but there is a sizeable investment going on around the world for this sort of technology, particularly for weaponeering. For example, imagine being able to identify someone who is about to fire a rifle as apposed to someone carrying tools around his garden. Or all those cameras in the UK. Being able to identify a crime taking place automatically would be a huge benefit to If the problem of PR has been solved I don't think that your government or mine would have any qualms about using the technology in the name of 'national security' or whatever. Money might change hands at a later date but it wouldn't stop the technology being taken and used.
OK, if it is able to identify 'content' - and does not use a human to provide this function but achieves it entirely in software - then it must take a series of snapshots of the video and use some form of key (or hash?) for each snapshot. That is not a hash for the entire file but a series of hashes which can provide a unique fingerprint. The processing power required to do this, and to subsequently search submissions in an attempt to find a matching hash will be immense.
Pattern recognition is improving all the time but it is still nowhere near able to recognise content(i.e. girl dancing in bedroom, skateboarder falling arse over tit etc) with sufficient accuracy to enable PR to be used. If this problem HAS been solved, I would expect the military and other scientific fields to be investing in it far more than a web video hosting site.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps you should build them without curbs then?
So US cars do explode when they crash - just like in films! Fortunately, I drive a European car....... :-)))
Its a pity then that we lost as many soldiers in GW1 to US attacks as we did to the 'enemy'. Laser guidance if fine if you can point it in the right direction. Cheers mate.
I was trying, but as a hobby programmer I used it exactly as you described. I use it to store my scripts, source code and documentation.
My bad. Shuts mouth and leaves quietly.....
I wasn't trying to troll. I had a genuine question. It has now been answered.
Thank you. This is an answer that I can relate to. Still not what I need, but I can see why some people might want to do it.
Not quite - but thanks for your contribution to an intelligent discussion....
And yes, I have RTFA. I just cannot think why I would want to do what they suggest...
I know it can handle binaries, but I cannot think why I would want to. Can anyone help?
They are quasi-legal in so much as the US (and only the US!) thinks that some of the contents are illegal. For the rest of us, there is no problem. Ubuntu doesn't have to solve the problems of a specific nation, you can do that yourselves.
When a new model of car is released onto the market, will you have a problem because it has a name that you do not recognise? No, I suspect that you will cope, its just that you can't be bothered when it comes to linux. That is not a linux problem.
It wasn't intended as 'obnoxious European holier-than-thou-ism'.
It was simply pointing out that there are only a few countries (perhaps even only one) where DVD playback is a problem. Installing libdvdcss2 and w32codecs takes less than 30 seconds and is not illegal where I live. They perhaps aren't installed by default in the same way that apache2, tor or blender are not installed - not everyone will want it.
Will Dell Europe be able to sell computers with linux installed and DVD playback already enabled? If not, why not?
but only in the US. The rest of us have no problems with DVD playback, listening to MP3 or whatever.
You can always tell when someone is losing an argument on /. First they switch to posting as AC, and then they use expletives and obscenities.
I am surprised that the raids were conducted by Microsoft - why not the appropriate law enforcement agency?
What gives Microsoft the legal right to 'conduct raids'? They can perhaps visit the dealers (which they did in this case by introducing a dummy customer) and threaten to take legal action if they, the dealers, do not stop their illegal activities. However, they cannot conduct raids, demand payments or issue fines. That is the function of law enforcement and the judiciary.
The language in which the OP is written suggests that it is the product of 'spin' and is not an accurate version of events. There was no 'raid'.
No, I don't agree. Most people would find what you describe as objectionable and would therefore practice self-censorship. The problem however is when someone else is doing the censoring and then you might not agree as to what is acceptable and what is not. While I do not think that your examples would be difficult to find some consensus of agreement, what would happen if someone with extreme views had the responsibility for deciding what is decent? I wouldn't want some religious zealot telling me what I can view, nor would the majority of the US accept, say, a muslim cleric deciding what kind of images are deemed 'suitable' for hosting on the video site. Family videos? Not acceptable if the subject includes a female and the hair is being displayed or anything more than the hands or feet in view, for example? No, censorship will always be wrong in someone's opinion.
This post is now superfluous - the parent to which it referred has been deleted. I wonder why they left this one floating in nowhere-land?
Firstly, if you feel so strongly, why post as AC? Secondly, the URL works correctly and points to the appropriate information. What exactly is your complaint with it? Thirdly, you might wish to have Zonk removed from the 'board of editors' but what do you hope to gain by 'banning his account'? Anyone can read /., and even AC's have the opportunity to post. Preventing AC's from posting would lead to a much more significant improvement in the quality of posts, or at least that is my opinion.
I find this entire thread quite alarming. There is often criticism of the UK's desire to have cameras located in places where they can observe the public and this fact is, rightly in my opinion, highlighted as an example of how the UK is becoming a totalitarian state. Yet in this thread there is widespread concern regarding how your Government can track your every move without using cameras. How is this better? Worst still, in this and many other threads, the likelihood of someone being anally raped whilst incarcerated in prison is stated as though it is almost a certainty. What kind of Government can lock people up but take no responsibility for their physical wellbeing whilst they are unable to do it for themselves? I hope that I never read of the US criticising some other country's human rights record when this this sort of behaviour appears to not only be tolerated but accepted as part of the punishment. Land of the free......? You would have more rights in Iran, Iraq or many of the other countries - yes, even the UK - than you appear to have at home.
The sense of humour is one of the few things that keeps me reading /.
Thanks.
In which case, you didn't install the software correctly. My installation asked me what screen resolutions I wanted to work at, and I can select any of them.
Not quite. Microsoft can pursue any developers in the US, but it has no claim over developers elsewhere. US law is NOT international law. :-)
Perhaps in the US, although I am not convinced, but there is a sizeable investment going on around the world for this sort of technology, particularly for weaponeering. For example, imagine being able to identify someone who is about to fire a rifle as apposed to someone carrying tools around his garden. Or all those cameras in the UK. Being able to identify a crime taking place automatically would be a huge benefit to If the problem of PR has been solved I don't think that your government or mine would have any qualms about using the technology in the name of 'national security' or whatever. Money might change hands at a later date but it wouldn't stop the technology being taken and used.
OK, if it is able to identify 'content' - and does not use a human to provide this function but achieves it entirely in software - then it must take a series of snapshots of the video and use some form of key (or hash?) for each snapshot. That is not a hash for the entire file but a series of hashes which can provide a unique fingerprint. The processing power required to do this, and to subsequently search submissions in an attempt to find a matching hash will be immense. Pattern recognition is improving all the time but it is still nowhere near able to recognise content(i.e. girl dancing in bedroom, skateboarder falling arse over tit etc) with sufficient accuracy to enable PR to be used. If this problem HAS been solved, I would expect the military and other scientific fields to be investing in it far more than a web video hosting site.