Ok now, let's see those friggin capitalists who have been in denial about global warming make a U-turn and start recognising it as a wonderfull thing they can turn into profit. Fry planet, fry!
By the powers invested in me, I now declare all patents null and void.
Voila,
problem solved, now we can get on with innovation instead of legal battles.
I'm not realy concerned about planes, boats and other ways we travel (GPS), but what about the birds (or any other species that migrates). Don't they use the magnetic poles to "navigate"?
Ah, Yes... Indeed... "Joe Sixpack" doesn't care... perhaps we should start changing the "Joe Sixpack"-label to a better alternative.. What about "Ben Dover" ? Ben Dover doesn't care... Ah, Yes... makes more sense now...
Ha:-) They realy didn't think of that, now did they ? Yeah, sure you can prevent people from taking pictures and stuff, but once installed, they render their own surveillance system useless.
When I was looking around for some more news on this, I came across this article:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2001/08/01080 7080356.htm
Seems like the regenerative abilities of MRL mice have been know for quite a while.
Seems like Professor Ellen Heber-Katz did the initial discovery in 1998.
How do you think they cut diamonds anyway? With diamonds! So if they can cut it, they can engrave it. I'm guessing the only reason why they don't is because the're so tiny and people want them to be shiny... unless you're found of having your name written on grain of rice.. but even that is like 20 times larges than most diamonds...
"In my day we etched our data into pottery. Talk about your long term enterprise data storage. Some of those buggers made it thousands of years!"
And still alive? Geez, dont post about floppys, just tell us how you managed to live for that long!:-)
And this makes it right? Geez, I've never seen the logic in "some other court thought is was OK, so I guess it must be". What's up with that ? Are they (the judges) hiding behind a precedent because they do not dare to make up their own mind? Or are they just lazy and mimic other judgements?
"In the US most of the large companies have clear strategies to increase open source in their product lines"
I think they might be doing this because the whole pattent buisiness is unsustainable. It costs money to file a pattent, and a lot more to uphold it. The only people getting better of the whole pattent-thing are the lawyers. When they move to open-source, there is nothing but advantanges:
- no need for pattents ( only copyright)
- software writes itself : iprovements can be made and bugs can be fixed by an enhousiastic community ( provided the software is something to be enhousiastic about )
- I'm even thinking they could "move" the development of these open-source software to (spinnof) Non-Profit companies -> even if the software is pattent-infinging it's source will have spread all over the world, and it's a non-profit company, so there is no money to be made in slapping a lawsuit on these guys... and eventualy this will lead to no software pattents... until someone has the bright idea to come up with software pattents and the cycle can start all over again because people never learn from history..
Hmm.. took a brief look at the specs and functionality of the system. Looks to me like once the key is broken , the only thing that needs to be done is load the player with software/firmware that ignores the list of revoced keys. From the specs : "AACS uses a drive-host authentication protocol to verify the integrity of the data received from the drive. In this protocol the host shall check that the Drive ID in the Drive Certificate is not in the Drive Revocation List Record. " Pfff..
You probably don't need a lot of spotters if you have the right video recognition software. A human can only watch so may screens at once, while software does not have this problem. Spotters will only have to watch video-fragments that the sofware recognizes as being potential hits. This could speed up and reduce cost of those search-actions a lot.
Ok, if users are like that, from now on I'll start my warnings, messages, etc with one of the following:
"Get V1AGRA Anonymously!" "80% off software!" "8x Longer than V1AGRA, and cheaper!" "PLEASE HEAR ME OUT ( GOD BLESS YOU )..." "CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS TRANSACTION" "Pen1s enlarg3ment p1lls" "CONGRATULATIONS!!! YOU HAVE WON"
This paragraph struck me as odd: "Another myth is that DeCSS is illegal because it uses a "stolen" key. A CSS key is 5 bytes. How anyone can think that it's possible to "steal" 5 bytes is beyond me. 5 bytes do not have any protection under copyright law because it's not an original work. It's probably possible for 5 bytes to be protected under trade secret law, but CSS hasn't been a trade secret since DeCSS was released and mirrored all over the net. Is someone who names their child "Frank" (5 bytes) stealing Frank's name? It's absurd."
If those 5 bytes are a key to unlock something.. ehm.. I think comparing that to someones first name is a bit weird. If someone has my credit-card code, I would say they stole my code.
For the record, as I do not want this thing to be flooded with "Great , go ahead and support DRM", I'm 100% against DRM. They have been spending a thousand times more on DRM-development than what they claim they have lost by illegal copies. DRM is only good if you want to finance the legal department and throw money out of the window, because no DRM will be 100% safe, and all DRM-schemes that I've seen passing by were broken, sometimes even before their official release. Not to mention they cause enormous headaches with their paying customers, and I don't think paying customers are the kind of people they want to piss off.
I understand digital pictures very well, and that's exactly one of the reasons I did ask this question. Perhaps posted a bit too quicly, but let me elaborate a bit : I do know that more megapixels means more detail (at least in theory.. depends on the size and quelity of the sensor). They used Leica, so at least they used some decent material, but still.. colour is what this was all about.
They had to correct the picture with some complex calculations -> no matter how cool those calculations might be, you loose colour and detail.
Representation : allthough you can accurately represent a colour digitally, it doesn't mean you can catch it perfectly. To be quite honest, I don't know a single digital camera that can -> all camera's ( except Sigme DS9 and DS10.. different sensor) use interpolation to calculate the colour of a single pixel (do a simple google search and you'll find out why).
Next : representation : you need a pretty fine-tuned and nicely callibrated screen to visualise the actual correct colour.. joy : how may folks have that ?
Prints? I'm not even going to go into that one.. diffent inkt and diffent paper, and you get a whole different colour.
Point being : although the colour might be close, I double it will be correct, and that whas exactly what this project is all about. So their giga-pixel picture might be nice to look at, but it misses it's goal.
I can see why one would like to calcutate Pi as far as possoble,.. but tapestries ?
Spending months on a multi-gigabyte picture of a tapestrie? Geez, and it's probably not even "correct" as they had to mathematicly correct some deformation or whatever errors.
Seriously, what's the point?
Are they doing this "just because we can", or is there some "higher goal"?
I'm just curious : how can they observer without interfering the process they observe? I'm no biologist, but I'm pretty sure the nucleus must have some kind of reaction to a foreign body entering it.
Not to mention the recation coused by the illuminating the nucleus: these probes seem to emit some kind of light.
This must have at least some effect on the readings they get from these probes.
Slashdot Mirror
Homer: Nucular... It's pronounced Nucular ...
Let's not forget a banana.. if anything, a librarian needs a banana!
Ok now, let's see those friggin capitalists who have been in denial about global warming make a U-turn and start recognising it as a wonderfull thing they can turn into profit.
Fry planet, fry!
By the powers invested in me, I now declare all patents null and void. Voila, problem solved, now we can get on with innovation instead of legal battles.
I'm not realy concerned about planes, boats and other ways we travel (GPS), but what about the birds (or any other species that migrates).
Don't they use the magnetic poles to "navigate"?
Ah, Yes...
Indeed...
"Joe Sixpack" doesn't care...
perhaps we should start changing the "Joe Sixpack"-label to a better alternative..
What about "Ben Dover" ?
Ben Dover doesn't care...
Ah, Yes... makes more sense now...
.. do NOT click on the "64 educational robots" link...
Ha :-) They realy didn't think of that, now did they ? Yeah, sure you can prevent people from taking pictures and stuff, but once installed, they render their own surveillance system useless.
When I was looking around for some more news on this, I came across this article: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2001/08/01080 7080356.htm
Seems like the regenerative abilities of MRL mice have been know for quite a while.
Seems like Professor Ellen Heber-Katz did the initial discovery in 1998.
How do you think they cut diamonds anyway? With diamonds! So if they can cut it, they can engrave it. I'm guessing the only reason why they don't is because the're so tiny and people want them to be shiny... unless you're found of having your name written on grain of rice.. but even that is like 20 times larges than most diamonds...
"In my day we etched our data into pottery. Talk about your long term enterprise data storage. Some of those buggers made it thousands of years!" And still alive? Geez, dont post about floppys, just tell us how you managed to live for that long! :-)
"FWIW, the CT case is not unprecedented:"
And this makes it right?
Geez, I've never seen the logic in "some other court thought is was OK, so I guess it must be".
What's up with that ?
Are they (the judges) hiding behind a precedent because they do not dare to make up their own mind?
Or are they just lazy and mimic other judgements?
"In the US most of the large companies have clear strategies to increase open source in their product lines"
: .. and eventualy this will lead to no software pattents... until someone has the bright idea to come up with software pattents and the cycle can start all over again because people never learn from history..
I think they might be doing this because the whole pattent buisiness is unsustainable. It costs money to file a pattent, and a lot more to uphold it. The only people getting better of the whole pattent-thing are the lawyers.
When they move to open-source, there is nothing but advantanges
- no need for pattents ( only copyright)
- software writes itself : iprovements can be made and bugs can be fixed by an enhousiastic community ( provided the software is something to be enhousiastic about )
- I'm even thinking they could "move" the development of these open-source software to (spinnof) Non-Profit companies -> even if the software is pattent-infinging it's source will have spread all over the world, and it's a non-profit company, so there is no money to be made in slapping a lawsuit on these guys.
300GB in 2006 WORM 200 milliseconds access time ..
Pff... this thing is dead before it hits the market.
Hmm..
took a brief look at the specs and functionality of the system.
Looks to me like once the key is broken , the only thing that needs to be done is load the player with software/firmware that ignores the list of revoced keys.
From the specs : "AACS uses a drive-host authentication protocol to verify the integrity of
the data received from the drive. In this protocol the host shall check that the Drive ID in the Drive Certificate is
not in the Drive Revocation List Record.
"
Pfff..
I wouldn't say none goes to peace, but indeed, a large ammount goes to war.
You probably don't need a lot of spotters if you have the right video recognition software. A human can only watch so may screens at once, while software does not have this problem.
Spotters will only have to watch video-fragments that the sofware recognizes as being potential hits.
This could speed up and reduce cost of those search-actions a lot.
You forgot the Brits :-)
British Comedy shows/movies are rated amongst the best comedy series/movies of the world.
And some other great movies too.
I bet they can make some fun of the Movie and Film Industry Association too, and we can all have a great laugh!
Ok, if users are like that, from now on I'll start my warnings, messages, etc with one of the following :
..."
"Get V1AGRA Anonymously!"
"80% off software!"
"8x Longer than V1AGRA, and cheaper!"
"PLEASE HEAR ME OUT ( GOD BLESS YOU )
"CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS TRANSACTION"
"Pen1s enlarg3ment p1lls"
"CONGRATULATIONS!!! YOU HAVE WON"
This paragraph struck me as odd:
"Another myth is that DeCSS is illegal because it uses a "stolen" key. A CSS key is 5 bytes. How anyone can think that it's possible to "steal" 5 bytes is beyond me. 5 bytes do not have any protection under copyright law because it's not an original work. It's probably possible for 5 bytes to be protected under trade secret law, but CSS hasn't been a trade secret since DeCSS was released and mirrored all over the net. Is someone who names their child "Frank" (5 bytes) stealing Frank's name? It's absurd."
If those 5 bytes are a key to unlock something.. ehm.. I think comparing that to someones first name is a bit weird. If someone has my credit-card code, I would say they stole my code.
For the record, as I do not want this thing to be flooded with "Great , go ahead and support DRM", I'm 100% against DRM. They have been spending a thousand times more on DRM-development than what they claim they have lost by illegal copies. DRM is only good if you want to finance the legal department and throw money out of the window, because no DRM will be 100% safe, and all DRM-schemes that I've seen passing by were broken, sometimes even before their official release. Not to mention they cause enormous headaches with their paying customers, and I don't think paying customers are the kind of people they want to piss off.
I understand digital pictures very well, and that's exactly one of the reasons I did ask this question. Perhaps posted a bit too quicly, but let me elaborate a bit : I do know that more megapixels means more detail (at least in theory.. depends on the size and quelity of the sensor). They used Leica, so at least they used some decent material, but still.. colour is what this was all about. They had to correct the picture with some complex calculations -> no matter how cool those calculations might be, you loose colour and detail. Representation : allthough you can accurately represent a colour digitally, it doesn't mean you can catch it perfectly. To be quite honest, I don't know a single digital camera that can -> all camera's ( except Sigme DS9 and DS10 .. different sensor) use interpolation to calculate the colour of a single pixel (do a simple google search and you'll find out why).
Next : representation : you need a pretty fine-tuned and nicely callibrated screen to visualise the actual correct colour.. joy : how may folks have that ?
Prints? I'm not even going to go into that one.. diffent inkt and diffent paper, and you get a whole different colour.
Point being : although the colour might be close, I double it will be correct, and that whas exactly what this project is all about. So their giga-pixel picture might be nice to look at, but it misses it's goal.
I can see why one would like to calcutate Pi as far as possoble, .. but tapestries ?
Spending months on a multi-gigabyte picture of a tapestrie? Geez, and it's probably not even "correct" as they had to mathematicly correct some deformation or whatever errors.
Seriously, what's the point?
Are they doing this "just because we can", or is there some "higher goal"?
I'm just curious : how can they observer without interfering the process they observe? I'm no biologist, but I'm pretty sure the nucleus must have some kind of reaction to a foreign body entering it. Not to mention the recation coused by the illuminating the nucleus: these probes seem to emit some kind of light. This must have at least some effect on the readings they get from these probes.
Duck?
what duck?
Just switch to warp-speed! Speed of light..pfff.. that is sooo passé...