Errors like this are
pardon parcel with learning english from talking and hearing and not by reading. I mean, nobody expects a slashdot post to win the pullet surprise or anything, but he could of spent a moment proofreading his post. For all intensive purposes
Okay, now *I* feel like the moron. I read it, laughed, then read that you'd put four errors in. I must be a moron, since I can't see the fourth...?
Looking over the now available text of the bill, I see that it has no "one time" text, and in fact reads:
No person may apply a security measure that uses a standard security technology to prevent a lawful recipient from making a personal copy for lawful use in the home of programming at the time it is lawfully performed on an over-the-air broadcast, premium or non-premium satellite channel, by a television broadcast station (asdefined in section 122(j)(5)(A) of title 17. United States Code), a cable system (as defined in section 111(f) of such title), or a satellite carrier (as defined in section 119(d)(6) of such title).
Unfortunately, I'm not sure quite how to parse "lawful recipient from making a personal copy for lawful use in the home of programming at the time it is lawfully performed". I think this means
IF((recipient==lawful)&&(copy==personal)&&(home==o riginal legal receiving location)&&(original performance==lawful)) THEN allowed
But unfortunately I'm no senator, and this line really doesn't make much sense to me. Anyone have any insight?
Copies
of TV broadcasts made for one-time personal use at home are also permitted.
Note also the "one time" text. Thus, any device which doesn't self-delete the data as it plays it back would be in violation of the SSSCA (CBDTPA). Since VCRs are electronic devices, would this make VCR sales illegal?
But that difference is what's changing. Thus the printed maps will be out of date
IIRC, marine charts (what a map's called when you put it on a boat) at least regularly have correction sheets printed, so the charts don't go out of date as quickly.
Re:Stupid question
on
ORBZ Shuts Down
·
· Score: 5, Informative
why can't ORBZ use a different envelope that doesn't bounce to 127.0.0.1
Because they're testing for obscure bugs that allow spammers to use a server as an open relay even when its configured properly.
Re:Sounds weak to me
on
ORBZ Shuts Down
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Why not just use another envelope? I'm guessing ORBZ wanted to go away anyway and are using this as an excuse.
They used multiple envelope types when checking a relay that had requested to be taken off the list in order to make sure the site couldn't be used by a spammer. Some of the envelopes were unorthodox envelopes that spammers could use to get through a particular server's bugs, making an apparently clean mail server an open relay.
Except as otherwise permitted by the NetMeeting, Remote Assistance, and Remote Desktop features described below, you may not use the Product to permit any Device to use, access, display, or run other executable software residing on the Workstation Computer, nor may you permit any Device to use, access, display, or run the Product or Product's user interface, unless the Device has a separate license for the Product.
What part of "unless" don't you understand?
The part where you attach "unless" to the text before the "nor" I've bolded above. From the text, it appears to be attached to displaying the display/ui, not running executables. I can see where it might be ambiguous, though.
hmm, i'm in linux and just 'remote desktop'd in to a windows XP box.. the program to do so is called, remarkably, rdesktop.. works very nicely.
Nobody said you can't physically do it, just that you can't contractually do it. You're voiding the license to do it. I know you don't really care, but a company that uses a thousand installations of a given os and has standardised around using a vnc for tech support, systems maintenance, or systems administration will care.
Powerpoint - the whole idea of computer aided presentations is a joke. Learn to speak in front of people - it's not that hard.
Personally I think computer aided presentations is great. It means I can get a copy of the slides used in a presentation later. Especially good for college students at wired colleges. (No more need to take all those notes:) Of course, why they can't just use some jpegs or png's and an image viewer I don't know.
<rant>What I can't stand is when the office idiot sends around their document in powerpoint format. Or an invitation to a party. WTF???</rant>
(Amazing that in this age when all banking systems are interconnected that your transfers and deposits can still take up to a week... that's something the banks didn't want written out of the system during the last revision of banking laws.)
Ever work at a bank? I did some programming for one of the bigger banks in the northeast last year. Very little is realtime. Most things get processed in huge nightly (weeknightly) batch jobs. If a check has to get cleared against another bank, you're talking one night in the bank you made the deposit at, one night for processing at the other bank, and another night for processing at your local bank. I'm not sure about file transit, but those might be additional nights.
The important fact to note is that when empty space is wiped, slack space for all files remains intact. If file is wiped (at least using current version of GNU shred), the associated slack space is NOT wiped with it!
Yeah, as an employer I'm always impressed by a potential employee's willingness to take it up the ass for me.
I expect this was meant as a joke, but in most (if not all) of the companies I've worked in or consulted for, that attitude is ideal management material.
Plus, I wonder that without an RF "hotspot" where the antenna is, would this phone have a *better* chance of irradiating your head?
I'd been chuckling at the em-irradiating of the head comments until I read this one. It actually presents an interesting thought...
A standard antenna radiates from where the antenna is, thus bombarding the area of the head closest to it with strong EM waves. But, with the whole phone broadcasting the waves, the antenna is larger, power output observed near infinity is the same (because, as you say, the output power is 'just enough'), and therefore the average power/cm^2 of antenna is lower. Therefore, you have a larger area of the head being bombarded, but with a significantly reduced power level. I'd tend to say that the lower power level received per cell (biological cell, not cell-tower cell) would actually make the larger/less powerful antenna better for you.
Re:You don't understand the spirit then.
on
Abusing the GPL?
·
· Score: 1
(from gpl)the preferred form of the work for
making modifications to it
Obviously the clean source is preferred, but not required.
No, what's required is the form of the code the programmers prefer to use. If this goes to court, the question will be "Do your programmers work with the obfuscated code or the non-obfuscated code?", and the answer will make all the difference.
It is wildly nonlinear and unpredictable, and your telling the public that this is 'safe' is quite irresponsible - especially when you also claim to be a Reactor Physics Engineer.
But while radiation mutation is hit and miss, mutations from civilian reactor installations are no more likely than from background radiation. (Unless you're working at the plant.) The amount of radiation from a nuclear plant as close as 1 mile (and less, if I recall correctly) is indistinguishable from normal background radiation. That's right, there's normal background radiation happening around you right now. Alpha particles hitting your skin, betas flying by and through you, etc. These are a normal part of our life, which we've evolved to resist.
And you clearly aren't a fair use expert either. It is generally accepted that you may make a copy of a work and give it to your friend for no consideration (i.e., money, profit, benefit, etc...). This is a noncommercial private transaction. This is, in fact, what Napster tried to base their case on. They claimed that the people using the service were members of a 'community' and that the users were aware of each other enough that it wasn't a 'public' exchange of copies. However, Napster's use was so widespread that they were effectively publically disseminating copies. Of course, that doesn't take the DMCA into account, which changes everything, preventing you from exercising what were formerly fair use actions on your digital media.
It is certainly not considered fair use just because you are in physical contact with the person receiving your pirated warez! What does that have to do with anything?
It has to do with the fact that it is a private, as opposed to a public, transaction. If you are disseminating your 'warez' over usenet, that's a public transaction. If you're doing it in your basement with a friend, that's a private transaction. Of course, I wasn't discussing software, because software copies are restricted by their license. As you can see, the line between public and private transaction can become a bit blurry, as the Napster case is evidence of.
It is also NOT legal to pirate albums on cassette.
Actually, it is. Provided you're only making copies and giving those to a friend in a private noncommercial transaction. Unfortunately, the actual law here is a bit vague, but large copyright interests (such as the RIAA) have been trying to make people believe private 'piracy' is illegal for years now, and its beginning to work.
I just made a compilation cd of classical music for a friend.
Whoa, there. Hold it. That's not theft, though, because that falls under fair use. You're allowed to personally make copies of things and hand them to a friend. (Ok, it was fair use until the DMCA stripped you of that right in the US regarding digital media.) It is entirely legal to do with an audio tape, still. The problem in question is regarding widespread sharing with people you have no real contact with. If your only contact is to put up those same songs on a website or file sharing program and have anyone who wants copies download them, then you're no longer 'sharing with a friend', and thus invite copyright infringement issues.
Sure you could transform the scale, but the problem is that you typically only have 8 bits of intensity information (or maybe 10 in some cases, I believe). That not a very wide range. I don't remember exactly what the dynamic range of film is, but it's way higher than this (maybe someone knowledgeable could give their 2c about this).
I'm sure I'll get flamed from a filmphile for pointing it out, but at best the color range of a film camera has been placed at 100 levels by some of the most competent experts out there. Compare that to your 8 or 10 bits, and you have 100 levels vs. an available 256 or 1024. Of course, the problem may be that the 100 levels of film are logarithmic, based on what the eye can discern, and the 8 or 10 bits of a digital are linear. Of course, that just means someone needs to come up with a jpg-like format which scales the numbers logarithmically, and decodes them later for displaying.
Slashdot Mirror
Note also the "one time" text.
Looking over the now available text of the bill, I see that it has no "one time" text, and in fact reads:
Unfortunately, I'm not sure quite how to parse "lawful recipient from making a personal copy for lawful use in the home of programming at the time it is lawfully performed". I think this means
IF((recipient==lawful)&&(copy==personal)&&(home==o riginal legal receiving location)&&(original performance==lawful)) THEN allowed
But unfortunately I'm no senator, and this line really doesn't make much sense to me. Anyone have any insight?
Note also the "one time" text. Thus, any device which doesn't self-delete the data as it plays it back would be in violation of the SSSCA (CBDTPA). Since VCRs are electronic devices, would this make VCR sales illegal?
IIRC, marine charts (what a map's called when you put it on a boat) at least regularly have correction sheets printed, so the charts don't go out of date as quickly.
They used multiple envelope types when checking a relay that had requested to be taken off the list in order to make sure the site couldn't be used by a spammer. Some of the envelopes were unorthodox envelopes that spammers could use to get through a particular server's bugs, making an apparently clean mail server an open relay.
they surely cant take up any less space
Those of us who read the article know they're 1/10th the thickness of standard cds. Thus, they do indeed take up less space.
Except as otherwise permitted by the NetMeeting, Remote Assistance, and Remote Desktop features described below, you may not use the Product to permit any Device to use, access, display, or run other executable software residing on the Workstation Computer, nor may you permit any Device to use, access, display, or run the Product or Product's user interface, unless the Device has a separate license for the Product.
The part where you attach "unless" to the text before the "nor" I've bolded above. From the text, it appears to be attached to displaying the display/ui, not running executables. I can see where it might be ambiguous, though.
OMG! Microsoft is abusing their monopoly to expand into the trojan market! Pretty soon there's be no option except Microsoft brand trojans!
Just what my wife and I need... one that breaks every time we use it.
hmm, i'm in linux and just 'remote desktop'd in to a windows XP box.. the program to do so is called, remarkably, rdesktop .. works very nicely.
Nobody said you can't physically do it, just that you can't contractually do it. You're voiding the license to do it. I know you don't really care, but a company that uses a thousand installations of a given os and has standardised around using a vnc for tech support, systems maintenance, or systems administration will care.
Powerpoint - the whole idea of computer aided presentations is a joke. Learn to speak in front of people - it's not that hard.
Personally I think computer aided presentations is great. It means I can get a copy of the slides used in a presentation later. Especially good for college students at wired colleges. (No more need to take all those notes:) Of course, why they can't just use some jpegs or png's and an image viewer I don't know.
<rant>What I can't stand is when the office idiot sends around their document in powerpoint format. Or an invitation to a party. WTF???</rant>
(Amazing that in this age when all banking systems are interconnected that your transfers and deposits can still take up to a week... that's something the banks didn't want written out of the system during the last revision of banking laws.)
Ever work at a bank? I did some programming for one of the bigger banks in the northeast last year. Very little is realtime. Most things get processed in huge nightly (weeknightly) batch jobs. If a check has to get cleared against another bank, you're talking one night in the bank you made the deposit at, one night for processing at the other bank, and another night for processing at your local bank. I'm not sure about file transit, but those might be additional nights.
It's called "being short sighted" short-term gain for long-term pain
Under some circumstances, its also called price gouging, and is illegal.
I'm surprised some Boston Market exec didn't walk in and start bitching about the smell.
That assumes a Boston Market exec would actually be caught eating at Boston Market.
The important fact to note is that when empty space is wiped, slack space for all files remains intact. If file is wiped (at least using current version of GNU shred), the associated slack space is NOT wiped with it!
So maybe we should fix shred, then.
Now just how far back do you have to stand to fit the whole universe in the frame?
Yeah, as an employer I'm always impressed by a potential employee's willingness to take it up the ass for me.
I expect this was meant as a joke, but in most (if not all) of the companies I've worked in or consulted for, that attitude is ideal management material.
Sad commentary...
Just make sure he doesn't put his serial modem too close to the window...
Plus, I wonder that without an RF "hotspot" where the antenna is, would this phone have a *better* chance of irradiating your head?
I'd been chuckling at the em-irradiating of the head comments until I read this one. It actually presents an interesting thought...
A standard antenna radiates from where the antenna is, thus bombarding the area of the head closest to it with strong EM waves. But, with the whole phone broadcasting the waves, the antenna is larger, power output observed near infinity is the same (because, as you say, the output power is 'just enough'), and therefore the average power/cm^2 of antenna is lower. Therefore, you have a larger area of the head being bombarded, but with a significantly reduced power level. I'd tend to say that the lower power level received per cell (biological cell, not cell-tower cell) would actually make the larger/less powerful antenna better for you.
(from gpl)the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it
Obviously the clean source is preferred, but not required.
No, what's required is the form of the code the programmers prefer to use. If this goes to court, the question will be "Do your programmers work with the obfuscated code or the non-obfuscated code?", and the answer will make all the difference.
It is wildly nonlinear and unpredictable, and your telling the public that this is 'safe' is quite irresponsible - especially when you also claim to be a Reactor Physics Engineer.
But while radiation mutation is hit and miss, mutations from civilian reactor installations are no more likely than from background radiation. (Unless you're working at the plant.) The amount of radiation from a nuclear plant as close as 1 mile (and less, if I recall correctly) is indistinguishable from normal background radiation. That's right, there's normal background radiation happening around you right now. Alpha particles hitting your skin, betas flying by and through you, etc. These are a normal part of our life, which we've evolved to resist.
And you clearly aren't a fair use expert either. It is generally accepted that you may make a copy of a work and give it to your friend for no consideration (i.e., money, profit, benefit, etc...). This is a noncommercial private transaction. This is, in fact, what Napster tried to base their case on. They claimed that the people using the service were members of a 'community' and that the users were aware of each other enough that it wasn't a 'public' exchange of copies. However, Napster's use was so widespread that they were effectively publically disseminating copies. Of course, that doesn't take the DMCA into account, which changes everything, preventing you from exercising what were formerly fair use actions on your digital media.
It is certainly not considered fair use just because you are in physical contact with the person receiving your pirated warez! What does that have to do with anything?
It has to do with the fact that it is a private, as opposed to a public, transaction. If you are disseminating your 'warez' over usenet, that's a public transaction. If you're doing it in your basement with a friend, that's a private transaction. Of course, I wasn't discussing software, because software copies are restricted by their license. As you can see, the line between public and private transaction can become a bit blurry, as the Napster case is evidence of.
It is also NOT legal to pirate albums on cassette.
Actually, it is. Provided you're only making copies and giving those to a friend in a private noncommercial transaction. Unfortunately, the actual law here is a bit vague, but large copyright interests (such as the RIAA) have been trying to make people believe private 'piracy' is illegal for years now, and its beginning to work.
Right, I just dare anyone to moderate the above down as -1 Offtopic !
Some idiot already moderated it down -1 Overrated !
I just made a compilation cd of classical music for a friend.
Whoa, there. Hold it. That's not theft, though, because that falls under fair use. You're allowed to personally make copies of things and hand them to a friend. (Ok, it was fair use until the DMCA stripped you of that right in the US regarding digital media.) It is entirely legal to do with an audio tape, still. The problem in question is regarding widespread sharing with people you have no real contact with. If your only contact is to put up those same songs on a website or file sharing program and have anyone who wants copies download them, then you're no longer 'sharing with a friend', and thus invite copyright infringement issues.
Sure you could transform the scale, but the problem is that you typically only have 8 bits of intensity information (or maybe 10 in some cases, I believe). That not a very wide range. I don't remember exactly what the dynamic range of film is, but it's way higher than this (maybe someone knowledgeable could give their 2c about this).
I'm sure I'll get flamed from a filmphile for pointing it out, but at best the color range of a film camera has been placed at 100 levels by some of the most competent experts out there. Compare that to your 8 or 10 bits, and you have 100 levels vs. an available 256 or 1024. Of course, the problem may be that the 100 levels of film are logarithmic, based on what the eye can discern, and the 8 or 10 bits of a digital are linear. Of course, that just means someone needs to come up with a jpg-like format which scales the numbers logarithmically, and decodes them later for displaying.