Don't be an ass. The AHRA of 1992 give you the right to convert your analog music between formats if you have the equipment to do so, and that analog media doesn't have active DRM on it (and neither does the hardware) to prevent you from doing so.
The digital music we're talking about in this thread, while free (gratis), will not allow you to perform the equivalent media transformation regardless of your ability to actually make it happen.
BINGO! We have a winner! That's the whole point! DRM does nothing to limit the rights conveyed in AHRA/1992. It is an add-on to current digital storage technology, but does nothing to limit your fair use of purchased material. It limits the ability to make a pure digital-to-digital copy which, while inconvenient, is no more a barrier than it used to be to connect a record player to a cassette deck to transfer songs between formats.
You can always convert through analog to make a copy. Quality may suffer (or get really bad in the case of Macrovision) but you can exercise your fair use rights. Fair Use does not guarantee that your fair use copy will be as pristine as the original.
I want to be able to play the music that I purchase on whatever device I choose. Period.
Can you help me out? I'm trying to play the 8-track I bought on my gramophone. I paid for it, so I should be able to play it on anything, right? Or How about a CD on my record player? They're both round, and hold music, so it should just work.
You seem to have missed the distinction between COMMENTARY and JOURNALISM.
The slashdot-linked article is clearly COMMENTARY (The column is "Crave Talk") and the original article (which was conveniently linked from the first paragraph, so you wouldn't have to search hither and yon for the source) is JOURNALISM.
UK spammer gets two months in bedroom
Colin Barker
ZDNet UK
A UK teenager pleaded guilty on Wednesday to breaking the Computer Misuse Act by crashing the email server of his former employer.
David Lennon, 18, was then sentenced to a two-month curfew by a judge in the Wimbledon Magistrates court.
Pretty clearly a UK judge, ruling on a UK teen, reported in a UK publication, by a UK Journalist (use Google to search for "Colin Barker cnet UK" and you find numerous hits which include "Colin Barker CNET UK reported from London" - I don't think they meant London, Ohio). I'm not sure where your rant on "US mob mentality" and US incarceration practices comes from.
My guess is that this is an emergency countermeasure in the event of a nuclear strike. Also from TFA: "If the intense radiation belts resulted from a rogue state detonating a nuclear-tipped missile in the upper atmosphere, using such remediation technology would probably be acceptable to the international community."
I hate to inform everyone, but the sky is not falling. At least not yet (always keep your towels handy in case it does).
Why would a rogue state go to the trouble of launching a nuke into space? My guess is Washington, NYC, LA, Prudhoe Bay, or some other ground target would be more appealing and easier to hit. Terrorists don't have to actually crash a plane to disrupt our air travel, so why would they (or a rogue state) have to take out our satellites to affect our communications? I think they are smarter than we give them credit.
May I nominate CmdrTaco? Or is Hungary offended by his geography skills?
May I also submit Johann Gambolputty de von
Ausfern-schplenden-schlitter-crasscrenbon-fried-di gger-dingle-dangle-
dongle-dungle-burstein-von-knacker-thrasher-apple- banger-horowitz-
ticolensic-grander-knotty-spelltinkle-grandlich-gr umblemeyer-
spelterwasser-kurstlich-himbleeisen-bahnwagen-gute nabend-bitte-ein-
nurnburger-bratwustle-gernspurten-mitz-weimache-lu ber-hundsfut-
gumberaber-shonedanker-kalbsfleisch-mittler-aucher von Hautkopft of Ulm?
They were confused. They don't really mean MICROSOFT Windows - this is the same old patch your HOUSE windows - cellophane and duct-tape. There's a red-level threat in the UK today, therefore nobody can carry-on water on airplanes in the US. Clearly water can kill you, so they are making sure none of that nasty humidity in the summer air can get into our homes. Thank goodness for the protective vigilance of our gubmint!
Do you know how long it took me to collect 14.3bln(+3, since its 2006 now) Candles and put them on the birthday cake? Where am I gonna come up with 1.5bln more at THIS hour?
1. EVERYONE knows the earth is flat. Science says so, my priest says so, the really smart guy next door says so. No need to listen to this kook who says the earth is round.
2. EVERYONE knows the sun revolves around the earth. It is plainly observable to any seeing person on any given day. It is reproducible - just watch it again tomorrow. Clearly irrefutable scientific proof. Ignore the one kook who says the earth revolves around the sun.
That was my favorite too, only because it was in the paragraph about "The free Internet Explorer 7 Blocker Toolkit". That is what they were saying is available for download.
1. Send email to 116 addresses advertising your spam product
2. Get the event posted to/. - Bask in the free publicity (how many/.ers heard the name Singlefin before this?)
4. ???
4. PROFIT!!!
I'm not surprised to prove your point - I think we are in agreement at most levels. We've just gone though the usual routine of build a quick and obvious implementation - fix the bugs with a bandaid - repeat. Nasty. We each are making different assumptions about the parser, since the parser code is not displayed here. Even simplicity is not a silver bullet, demonstrating there is no shortcut to well-thought-out design, regardless of the implementation technology or methodology.
I agree with your original statement "It's trivial to make a program that generates something it can't parse back" -- That was the point of the article, I think - people are looking to the trivial solutions instead of putting in the effort to design non-trivial programs that are robust enough to handle real-world conditions.
The designer should know the boundary conditions for write_value(). If potential values may have characters embedded which are key characters to a later parser, then it needs to embed a form of escape for those characters. You have not included code for a trivial parser, but your comments imply it does a simple character match to parse out substrings of each line.
Making the following 2 trivial changes to your example will restore parseability, since you are reading a buffer at a time. If there is any possibility of your value containing "~~~" or "~~~" then just change the delimiter to some other easily-identifiable sequence that is unlikely to appear in your data. This may not be "trivial" any more, but it is still not a complicated solution.
void write_value(int handle, char *key, char *value) { /* this is stupid, but not that hard to find */
A novel idea, but probably not the best-sounding things in the world. You will notice the tweeter is behind solid plastic of the faceplate. If I recall there are ventilation slots under the rim on the front, but not significant in an audio application. You could improve it by incorporating a fixed equalizer circuit to compensate for the loss of high frequency blocked by the case.
...Microsoft must be resurrecting Actimates Barney!
By getting entry-level programmers writing robot code they will be pre-disposed to the Actimates API, and will therefore build micro-borg robots instead of open-source robots.
0) receive pre-release Vista to look for holes
1) identify 3 or 4 holes in Vista
2) report 1 or 2 of them to microsoft
3) ??? = exploit remaining, unreported flaws
4) Profit!
The defence argued that if a large organisation, such as a bank, bought a large number of computers and never used the bundled Microsoft software and sold on the licences, that a company such as Digital could sell those licences, for which Microsoft had already been paid.
The judge rejected the argument. "The fallacy in the argument is that if the bank does not accept the EULA [licence] terms [by operating the software and agreeing the terms], it receives no licence. Thus it can confer no licence for the use of any Microsoft software by passing on the COA (certificate of authenticity), nor can the COA be evidence of, or itself confer, such a licence. Thus, provided that the licensing system is enforceable in law, the circumstances exemplified cannot give rise to a legitimate trade in COAs."
I'm trying to get my head around this ruling. On one hand it makes sense, on the other hand it doesn't. My question: if the bank receives no license because it paid money but didn't accept the EULA, then what did it receive for the money it paid?
Possible answers I can come up with:
1. The bank bought a computer, and chose not to use some software bundled with it, the same as if I "bought" Norton Antivirus with a new computer but never used it because I choose to use AVG. Dell won't refund to me their cost of the Norton software just because I don't choose to use it. Arguable, but not overly evil.
2. The bank bought a computer which was probably loaded with an OEM "only for sale with a new computer" license for Windows. The license should travel with the hardware, then. Arguable, moderately evil because of the whole "only with a computer" distinction.
3. ???
4. The judge got it wrong, and the bank should be able to sell the unused license the same as if they bought too many office chairs and sold the ones they never used. Non-evil, but IANAL.
Thoughts?
A panel of top climate scientists told lawmakers that the Earth is running a fever and that "human activities are responsible for much of the recent warming."...
So to carry the analogy further... if the earth has a fever that is a sign of an infection that the system is working to eliminate. If human activity is the cause of that we should let the earth run its course and burn out all the infection so it can be healthy again. It will recover once the virus is gone.
Gonzalez is missing the point! There is no 1st amendment conflict, because it is silly to go after a journalist for publishing information they are given.
The crime is not in the publishing, it is the leaking of the information to begin with. Punish the crime, not the downstream consequences!! If the information is CLASSIFIED then it is not available to the press, by definition, so there is no 1st amendment violation.
Same as the AT&T NSA thread - once the press has something, unless they violate copyright or plagiarize, they can print whatever they want under the 1st. The problem is not with the press, it is with whomever gave that information to the press.
Impressive name dropping. Too bad you don't know what you are talking about. The NSA does not use minimal path algorithms to search for records. The phone company switching equipment might have used them to construct the original call circuit.
Or maybe the NSA hired the kid-brother of an NSA agent who happens to be a math professor with a hot grad student and they applied the algorithms as suggested by their astrophysicist colleague?
Which raises an interesting question... Why do we assume the speed of light is constant? We know the speed of a particle can vary. We know the speed of a wave can vary. Light being, debatably, either or both, has no reason to hold its speed constant either.
Perhaps light is accelerating or decelerating at a rate imperceptible to us with our instruments or on our time-scale?
The implication, in my mind... if we cannot hold the speed of light as constant, then we cannot accurately use the speed of light as a measure of extreme distances or time periods, without knowing its change in acceleration/decelertaion over those periods.
These are honest questions for me that I would like to hear more discussion on... What are the prevailing thoughts on the constance of the speed of light?
Slashdot Mirror
Don't be an ass. The AHRA of 1992 give you the right to convert your analog music between formats if you have the equipment to do so, and that analog media doesn't have active DRM on it (and neither does the hardware) to prevent you from doing so.
The digital music we're talking about in this thread, while free (gratis), will not allow you to perform the equivalent media transformation regardless of your ability to actually make it happen.
BINGO! We have a winner! That's the whole point! DRM does nothing to limit the rights conveyed in AHRA/1992. It is an add-on to current digital storage technology, but does nothing to limit your fair use of purchased material. It limits the ability to make a pure digital-to-digital copy which, while inconvenient, is no more a barrier than it used to be to connect a record player to a cassette deck to transfer songs between formats.
You can always convert through analog to make a copy. Quality may suffer (or get really bad in the case of Macrovision) but you can exercise your fair use rights. Fair Use does not guarantee that your fair use copy will be as pristine as the original.
I want to be able to play the music that I purchase on whatever device I choose. Period.
Can you help me out? I'm trying to play the 8-track I bought on my gramophone. I paid for it, so I should be able to play it on anything, right? Or How about a CD on my record player? They're both round, and hold music, so it should just work.
You seem to have missed the distinction between COMMENTARY and JOURNALISM.
The slashdot-linked article is clearly COMMENTARY (The column is "Crave Talk") and the original article (which was conveniently linked from the first paragraph, so you wouldn't have to search hither and yon for the source) is JOURNALISM.
Pretty clearly a UK judge, ruling on a UK teen, reported in a UK publication, by a UK Journalist (use Google to search for "Colin Barker cnet UK" and you find numerous hits which include "Colin Barker CNET UK reported from London" - I don't think they meant London, Ohio). I'm not sure where your rant on "US mob mentality" and US incarceration practices comes from.
Do suppose he's starting this campaign using his l33t gaming keyboard?
Why would a rogue state go to the trouble of launching a nuke into space? My guess is Washington, NYC, LA, Prudhoe Bay, or some other ground target would be more appealing and easier to hit. Terrorists don't have to actually crash a plane to disrupt our air travel, so why would they (or a rogue state) have to take out our satellites to affect our communications? I think they are smarter than we give them credit.
May I nominate CmdrTaco? Or is Hungary offended by his geography skills?
i gger-dingle-dangle-
dongle-dungle-burstein-von-knacker-thrasher-apple- banger-horowitz-
ticolensic-grander-knotty-spelltinkle-grandlich-gr umblemeyer-
spelterwasser-kurstlich-himbleeisen-bahnwagen-gute nabend-bitte-ein-
nurnburger-bratwustle-gernspurten-mitz-weimache-lu ber-hundsfut-
gumberaber-shonedanker-kalbsfleisch-mittler-aucher von Hautkopft of Ulm?
May I also submit Johann Gambolputty de von Ausfern-schplenden-schlitter-crasscrenbon-fried-d
They were confused. They don't really mean MICROSOFT Windows - this is the same old patch your HOUSE windows - cellophane and duct-tape. There's a red-level threat in the UK today, therefore nobody can carry-on water on airplanes in the US. Clearly water can kill you, so they are making sure none of that nasty humidity in the summer air can get into our homes. Thank goodness for the protective vigilance of our gubmint!
Do you know how long it took me to collect 14.3bln(+3, since its 2006 now) Candles and put them on the birthday cake? Where am I gonna come up with 1.5bln more at THIS hour?
Two historical examples...
1. EVERYONE knows the earth is flat. Science says so, my priest says so, the really smart guy next door says so. No need to listen to this kook who says the earth is round.
2. EVERYONE knows the sun revolves around the earth. It is plainly observable to any seeing person on any given day. It is reproducible - just watch it again tomorrow. Clearly irrefutable scientific proof. Ignore the one kook who says the earth revolves around the sun.
That was my favorite too, only because it was in the paragraph about "The free Internet Explorer 7 Blocker Toolkit". That is what they were saying is available for download.
1. Send email to 116 addresses advertising your spam product /. - Bask in the free publicity (how many /.ers heard the name Singlefin before this?)
2. Get the event posted to
4. ???
4. PROFIT!!!
I'm not surprised to prove your point - I think we are in agreement at most levels. We've just gone though the usual routine of build a quick and obvious implementation - fix the bugs with a bandaid - repeat. Nasty. We each are making different assumptions about the parser, since the parser code is not displayed here. Even simplicity is not a silver bullet, demonstrating there is no shortcut to well-thought-out design, regardless of the implementation technology or methodology.
The designer should know the boundary conditions for write_value(). If potential values may have characters embedded which are key characters to a later parser, then it needs to embed a form of escape for those characters. You have not included code for a trivial parser, but your comments imply it does a simple character match to parse out substrings of each line.
Making the following 2 trivial changes to your example will restore parseability, since you are reading a buffer at a time. If there is any possibility of your value containing "~~~" or "~~~" then just change the delimiter to some other easily-identifiable sequence that is unlikely to appear in your data. This may not be "trivial" any more, but it is still not a complicated solution.
Blip-Verts!
The TV networks will love this!
A novel idea, but probably not the best-sounding things in the world. You will notice the tweeter is behind solid plastic of the faceplate. If I recall there are ventilation slots under the rim on the front, but not significant in an audio application. You could improve it by incorporating a fixed equalizer circuit to compensate for the loss of high frequency blocked by the case.
...Microsoft must be resurrecting Actimates Barney!
By getting entry-level programmers writing robot code they will be pre-disposed to the Actimates API, and will therefore build micro-borg robots instead of open-source robots.
0) receive pre-release Vista to look for holes 1) identify 3 or 4 holes in Vista 2) report 1 or 2 of them to microsoft 3) ??? = exploit remaining, unreported flaws 4) Profit!
I'm trying to get my head around this ruling. On one hand it makes sense, on the other hand it doesn't. My question: if the bank receives no license because it paid money but didn't accept the EULA, then what did it receive for the money it paid?
Possible answers I can come up with:
1. The bank bought a computer, and chose not to use some software bundled with it, the same as if I "bought" Norton Antivirus with a new computer but never used it because I choose to use AVG. Dell won't refund to me their cost of the Norton software just because I don't choose to use it. Arguable, but not overly evil.
2. The bank bought a computer which was probably loaded with an OEM "only for sale with a new computer" license for Windows. The license should travel with the hardware, then. Arguable, moderately evil because of the whole "only with a computer" distinction.
3. ???
4. The judge got it wrong, and the bank should be able to sell the unused license the same as if they bought too many office chairs and sold the ones they never used. Non-evil, but IANAL.
Thoughts?
Funny, the security seemed much tighter in Mission:Impossible.
*ducks and covers*
A panel of top climate scientists told lawmakers that the Earth is running a fever and that "human activities are responsible for much of the recent warming." ...
So to carry the analogy further... if the earth has a fever that is a sign of an infection that the system is working to eliminate. If human activity is the cause of that we should let the earth run its course and burn out all the infection so it can be healthy again. It will recover once the virus is gone.
I guess Agent Smith was right.
Gonzalez is missing the point! There is no 1st amendment conflict, because it is silly to go after a journalist for publishing information they are given.
The crime is not in the publishing, it is the leaking of the information to begin with. Punish the crime, not the downstream consequences!! If the information is CLASSIFIED then it is not available to the press, by definition, so there is no 1st amendment violation.
Same as the AT&T NSA thread - once the press has something, unless they violate copyright or plagiarize, they can print whatever they want under the 1st. The problem is not with the press, it is with whomever gave that information to the press.
Next time you are in court, how would you like evidence against you made public against the judge's orders, before the jury has made their decision?
Thank you Wired News for trampling what justice system we have left.
It's not a "wiretap". A wiretap is listening in. This is a record that 555-1212 called 555-1234.
I'm glad the mainstream media no longer has a monopoly on over-sensationalizing headlines.
They claim "terrorism" tracking, but they're really just trying to figure out how Chris Daughtry got voted off of American idol.
Impressive name dropping. Too bad you don't know what you are talking about. The NSA does not use minimal path algorithms to search for records. The phone company switching equipment might have used them to construct the original call circuit. Or maybe the NSA hired the kid-brother of an NSA agent who happens to be a math professor with a hot grad student and they applied the algorithms as suggested by their astrophysicist colleague?
Which raises an interesting question... Why do we assume the speed of light is constant? We know the speed of a particle can vary. We know the speed of a wave can vary. Light being, debatably, either or both, has no reason to hold its speed constant either.
... What are the prevailing thoughts on the constance of the speed of light?
Perhaps light is accelerating or decelerating at a rate imperceptible to us with our instruments or on our time-scale?
The implication, in my mind... if we cannot hold the speed of light as constant, then we cannot accurately use the speed of light as a measure of extreme distances or time periods, without knowing its change in acceleration/decelertaion over those periods.
These are honest questions for me that I would like to hear more discussion on