There's at least some logic here--if you shoplift a CD from a music store and get caught, do you think all you have to do is pay what the CD would have cost and you're home free? That implies there's no penalty for theft, which isn't the best of systems. Hence the concept that intentionally stealing an item of value has the potential to cost more than the actual value of the item
Not really a valid comparison, as I understand it fines for criminal behaviour don't go to the victims.
Broadband was hardly widely used in '97 (and recall that standards are devised before release), CDR was non-existent and hard drives were *tiny*. Internet piracy was not something they would have been concerned with when designing the standard, DVD->VHS would have been.
I would think encryption was used to enforce region controls and compel manufacturers into a restrictive license.
The movie industry operates under the assumption of piracy and I believe intentionally prevents consumer fair use.
According to The Inqurier here Intel's new EE model was scheduled for next month until shortly after it was leaked AMD was releasing dual Opterons this month in NY.
The Intel chip is in my opinion a proof of concept and will have the availability of the original P4EEs. Its also a pointless model, games aren't multi-threaded. AMD however is releasing a CPU aimed at the major multi-threaded market, high-end workstations and servers.
BS, look at small form factor PCs and you'll pay $200 just on the chasis, and it still won't be as small or quiet as a Mac mini.
$200 tag only occurs with HTPC (fad price gouging), barebones (brand + motherboard + PSU + pieces) or you're paying for a brand; otherwise you'll get chasis for <50 easily.
the Mac mini is very cheap if any off the following have value to you:
-footprint
-noise
-beautiful, fully-functional, secure, stable OS
-style
The fanboy in you seems to have disregarded the parents point that a Mac Mini isn't cheap if you aren't buying an OS. Size, style (though a computer isn't a fashion accessory), noise and OS are available elsewhere.
if you don't care about usability and judge things on "just the specs ma'am", then you can stick with your Intel box and continue to believe that uptimes should be measured in hours or that you only need 50% of your components supported anyway.
I must have missed where Mac systems caught up to and eclipsed others in uptime... oh wait no I didn't.
The same way you patent anything else, and for the same reasons. If I am some company, like Google, and I pay people money to spend time thinking up algorithms, it's only fair that I get to use them exclusively for a while. I paid for them, after all. Otherwise, there's no motivation outside of the goodness of my heart for me to keep mathematicians on my payroll. ... Also, what's the real difference between holding a patent on performing a chemical reaction in a particular way to increase yields and holding a patent on an algorithm to make web searches provide better results? Is chemistry somehow less real or less true just because it isn't purely intellectual? It seems to me that chemistry is as "owned in common" as philosophy or mathematics. Are you opposed to patents altogether?
Really though in both cases, no one outside of companies would have knowledge of the processes being used. The only exception would be if your employees broke NDAs.
Software patents seem to generally be for an end result and very vague method (some of which are commonly used methods, ie Amazon's 'no display flag').
Another problem with software patents is duration, 20-years is forever in the technology sector.
Sentances don't work as a deterrent, people don't know the length of penalties, and no one thinks they'll get caught.
The 9 year sentence is particularly rediculous when compared to what corrupt CEOs who ruin financial lives get (ie, Enron). An Annoying Bastard gets more time than thieves.
I don't believe when people refer to experts that they're referring to people on the payroll.
Food companies resist the GM label because the public hasn't really been informed about it and may have the impression all modified food is bad for you.
As I understood it downloading shows is only illegal if you aren't in a broadcast area.
To all those suggesting that networks should offer downloads at a price - its not going to happen. Until shows have worldwide simultaneous releases networks will not sacrafice the chance to sell broadcast rights. The amount networks could make from selling episodes is chump change compared to advertising & licensing.
And no, networks in country XYZ won't be offering downloads anytime soon as they haven't licensed for it. Until US networks make the content available online it won't be possible elsewhere. (Well, as far as US shows go)
Using a press release by the manufacturer is hardly a reliable source. For example the 5/6 isn't including the two times it inexplicably failed to launch. Incidentally since tests resumed in Dec/04 after a two-year hiatus, they've had one success two failures.
I'm unsure whether the following is correct:
-US Military stopped televising tests due to failures
-the only successful tests were with interceptors with advanced knowledge of target trajectory.
Slashdot Mirror
There's at least some logic here--if you shoplift a CD from a music store and get caught, do you think all you have to do is pay what the CD would have cost and you're home free? That implies there's no penalty for theft, which isn't the best of systems. Hence the concept that intentionally stealing an item of value has the potential to cost more than the actual value of the item
Not really a valid comparison, as I understand it fines for criminal behaviour don't go to the victims.
Adblock has two options 'hide ads' and 'remove ads', with 'hide ads' as far as the server knows you've seen it.
Broadband was hardly widely used in '97 (and recall that standards are devised before release), CDR was non-existent and hard drives were *tiny*. Internet piracy was not something they would have been concerned with when designing the standard, DVD->VHS would have been.
I would think encryption was used to enforce region controls and compel manufacturers into a restrictive license.
The movie industry operates under the assumption of piracy and I believe intentionally prevents consumer fair use.
According to The Inqurier here Intel's new EE model was scheduled for next month until shortly after it was leaked AMD was releasing dual Opterons this month in NY.
The Intel chip is in my opinion a proof of concept and will have the availability of the original P4EEs. Its also a pointless model, games aren't multi-threaded. AMD however is releasing a CPU aimed at the major multi-threaded market, high-end workstations and servers.
imo it sounds like they're shooting themselves in the foot in the long run.
So much short sightedness for short term stock increases :(
Conductors are usually the ones that check your tickets or collect fares.
The more 'news' I see the more I want to get away from the rest of the people on Earth
I don't mind RTFA but 10 pages is too much /snore
BS, look at small form factor PCs and you'll pay $200 just on the chasis, and it still won't be as small or quiet as a Mac mini.
$200 tag only occurs with HTPC (fad price gouging), barebones (brand + motherboard + PSU + pieces) or you're paying for a brand; otherwise you'll get chasis for <50 easily.
the Mac mini is very cheap if any off the following have value to you: -footprint -noise -beautiful, fully-functional, secure, stable OS -style
The fanboy in you seems to have disregarded the parents point that a Mac Mini isn't cheap if you aren't buying an OS. Size, style (though a computer isn't a fashion accessory), noise and OS are available elsewhere.
if you don't care about usability and judge things on "just the specs ma'am", then you can stick with your Intel box and continue to believe that uptimes should be measured in hours or that you only need 50% of your components supported anyway.
I must have missed where Mac systems caught up to and eclipsed others in uptime... oh wait no I didn't.
In my experience most people prefer the nforce line to the SiS/Via chipsets.
In fact, from reviews nVidia's nForce4 for Intel CPUs out performs Intel chipsets.
That isn't true, evolutionary science can, and has explained how eyes could have evolved.
Here is brief blurb: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/01/1/l_0 11_01.html
Cats and dogs have long been bred to emphasize certain attributes.
The same way you patent anything else, and for the same reasons. If I am some company, like Google, and I pay people money to spend time thinking up algorithms, it's only fair that I get to use them exclusively for a while. I paid for them, after all. Otherwise, there's no motivation outside of the goodness of my heart for me to keep mathematicians on my payroll.
...
Also, what's the real difference between holding a patent on performing a chemical reaction in a particular way to increase yields and holding a patent on an algorithm to make web searches provide better results? Is chemistry somehow less real or less true just because it isn't purely intellectual? It seems to me that chemistry is as "owned in common" as philosophy or mathematics. Are you opposed to patents altogether?
Really though in both cases, no one outside of companies would have knowledge of the processes being used. The only exception would be if your employees broke NDAs.
You need to clarify your first sentence.
How to Improve Reading Skills
Software patents seem to generally be for an end result and very vague method (some of which are commonly used methods, ie Amazon's 'no display flag').
Another problem with software patents is duration, 20-years is forever in the technology sector.
Sentances don't work as a deterrent, people don't know the length of penalties, and no one thinks they'll get caught.
The 9 year sentence is particularly rediculous when compared to what corrupt CEOs who ruin financial lives get (ie, Enron). An Annoying Bastard gets more time than thieves.
I'm going to have to side with ScentCone, his reply was also quite funny
I don't believe when people refer to experts that they're referring to people on the payroll.
Food companies resist the GM label because the public hasn't really been informed about it and may have the impression all modified food is bad for you.
They're smuggling crack again.
The 3.73EE is an 'enthusiast' CPU, it ought to be compared to AMD's 'enthusiast' CPUs.
We don't use Celerons to compare Intel & AMD64 and think its a useful comparison.
As I understood it downloading shows is only illegal if you aren't in a broadcast area.
To all those suggesting that networks should offer downloads at a price - its not going to happen. Until shows have worldwide simultaneous releases networks will not sacrafice the chance to sell broadcast rights. The amount networks could make from selling episodes is chump change compared to advertising & licensing.
And no, networks in country XYZ won't be offering downloads anytime soon as they haven't licensed for it. Until US networks make the content available online it won't be possible elsewhere. (Well, as far as US shows go)
You'd end up with low budget crap shows. That's what happens in Canada, the odd good show but most are embarassing.
Using a press release by the manufacturer is hardly a reliable source. For example the 5/6 isn't including the two times it inexplicably failed to launch. Incidentally since tests resumed in Dec/04 after a two-year hiatus, they've had one success two failures.
I'm unsure whether the following is correct:
-US Military stopped televising tests due to failures
-the only successful tests were with interceptors with advanced knowledge of target trajectory.
Except there have been lawsuits against the software packages that allow you to copy them.