We've got a 25 yr old Mexican Red-headed parrot that's a holy terror. He's not big, a little larger than a cockatiel, but he's a mean bastard. The thing loves my wife, gets all cudly and shit, but anyone else that comes near the cage, and he's out trying to tear you apart. Took a chunk out of the cat once, and the cat won't go near that room anymore.
they're tying to enforce a EULA on 3rd and 4th parties. Who the hell installs keyloggers on their own computer? Obviously, the "user" of the software is installing this discretely on someone else's computer. So the EULA is trying to prevent this 3rd party from scanning and removing the illicitely installed software, and trying to prevent the 4th party (anti-spyware/virus vendors) from facilitating the 3rd party in keeping their machine clean. And if a piece of software is installed without my permission on my own computer, I'm sure as hell not bound by any EULA's. This is really a moronic attempt to legitimize their malware.
The next trend in internet worms: hidden EULA's to prevent AV software from removing them?
I interpret this as good news. It means you should be free to modify stuff you bought to make it do your bidding regardless of what the copyright owner may want you to do with it.
I agree here. But I'm thinking more along the lines of game modding and related sites being safer from harassment with this ruling. Or any other kind of modification of software that I purchased. As I see it, after I buy it I'm free to tinker with my copy as much as I feel like it. So long as I don't break any other laws in the process, such as selling modified copies or something.
We had our photographer taking digital pics at ours, and she then gave us a CD of all of them. I doubt we'll have any future problems getting them printed or otherwise used how we choose. Well, so far we've had no problems getting print copies made.
I can't see it ever getting to that point. Even if it did, I'd be buying black market PC components from Europe/Japan with no TCP chips/devices. And/or wait for the crack to come out.
If you're reasonably ticked that you can't legally get around encrypted files to get at the media you've bought,
Bah, who cares about that? DMCA hasn't stopped me from getting to my media. The real problem is when printer companies start using the DMCA to try and prevent other companies from making accessories (ink cartridges) for their printers. When console companies use the DMCA to say that installing a modchip onto a piece of hardware you own is illegal. So whoop-ti-do about DRM, there will always be a way around that. Generally sourced from a country not under jurisdiction of this draconian law. My concern is with all the companies that would love to spin the law for their own purposes, when it was not designed for that.
Case in point, I taught my 5 yr old to use Photoshop to draw pictures. She doesn't understand anything about layers, and isn't good at selecting areas, but just watch her change colors, brush shapes/sizes (using the new right-click functionality of CS no less), the eraser... She works it as well as she does MS Paint. Better really, as she can get creative with the brush shapes. Having everything in toolbars as icons helps, as she can't read yet. Only the more advanced features of the program are tricky to learn. But the features most photographers probably use are laid out pretty obviously.
I've had t-mobile for about 5 years now. Never had a problem of any kind. So either the service is just way different in my areas (had it in both S FL and KY), or your buddy is just exagerrating.
So everytime I run, hop, skip, or jump (or otherwise walk differently than "normal") my phone is going to ask for a password? Yeah, sounds like a feature I'm dying to have.
I'd bet, phone mfgr's make almost all of their phone sales through carriers. The carriers decide which phones they want to sell to customers. If Motorola made a version of the phone which included all the nifty features, and no way to disable them by carriers, do you think Verizon would sell that phone in it's stores? I doubt it. They're bastards. This is one more thing I like about GSM. I don't have to buy a phone branded for my carrier. I can buy one that's only sold in Europe, and so long as it's tri-band, I can pop in my SIMM and use all the features the phone supports, whether T-Mobile likes it or not. I'm sure they hate the fact that I can copy ringtones and pictures directly to my phone from the PC, they make no extra money off of me. I guess I'm "stealing" from them. Heh.
That's the cost of serving content on the internet. Unless your site is a pay site, and says so, you cannot expect to make money off of random visitors. You put up a site knowing that hosting, bandwidth, and content are going to cost a certain amount, and I think any website based on a business model of getting paid simply by ad views was made to fail. This is not radio, TV, or print. Your consumers aren't obligated (or rather forced) to view/listen to your paid ads. I can't skip an ad on radio. But I sure would if I could. Same with TV. I hate commercials. I would live in my own little ad-free world if it were possible. Since I can skip ads on websites, I do. I don't care whether they're annoying or not, obtrusive or not, or even relevant to the page. I don't want to see them. If I want to buy a product, I'll go look for that product. If you want to make money from me to help pay for your website, sell something I might want. Make the site subscription based... if the content is good enough I'd pay. But understand that the old days of getting paid by mandatory ad viewing are over. You can't make the internet in the image of TV, it's not the same and never will be.
The day we have unbiased news, is the day we have computers writing the news reports for us. And even then, I'd wonder if the bias of the software developers who wrote the news reporting software was somehow being reflected.:)
The difference is, there are actually laws against "pretending" to sell drugs. Why? Because even though you aren't selling drugs, you are scamming people, which is then theft. Since downloading a movie is not (yet) a criminal offense, the worst they could do is try to sue you. I'm just not sure the court would award them damages in a case where they actually incurred no damages. Attempting to infringe a copyright and failing is not the same liability as actually infringing that copyright. Unless the court just wanted to "teach them a lesson".
Exactly. If they can't be held liable for "entrapment" by pretending to offer their own copyrighted works and tempting people to download them by placing them onto a filesharing network, then anyone who downloads this "fake" file can't be held on copyright infringement, because no copyright was ever actually infringed. And I don't think "attempted copyright infringement" is a law on the books yet.
Whoever modded this "troll" jumped the gun. He's right. It's worth $4-5 bucks to get a better rip, faster, than it is to wait a few hours for a crap quality rip to download. And then you'll be sure to get one the language of your choice, and without Chinese/French/Korean subtitles through the whole thing.:)
I agree, it won't be very effective. I've already seen it going on for a couple weeks now. I use Azureus with safepeer, and I know that if I start a torrent download and suddenly get 15 blocked IP's by safepeer, something is not right. Usually SP will block the IP's of every seeder of that torrent, thus preventing me from downloading any of it. A sure sign to drop the download, inform the site listing the torrent/tracker, and find a different copy of that torrent. Generally the site will drop the torrent and ban the tracker that listed it within hours. Unfortunately for the **AA's, user feedback will probably quash this method pretty quickly, unlike on the Kazaa network where it worked quite well.
It's not criminally illegal, but civil. So you can't be arrested (except under specific circustances) but you can be sued. It becomes criminal infringement if you make money off of doing it, or are part of an organized ring that deals in piracy. Although, IANAL.
I realized after posting, OP was looking for a wireless solution. Oh well. This could work as a partially wired system, however. The clickers are wired to the serial hubs, but make the serial hubs on 802.11 connections.
and that would be pretty simple to implement and code, would be to use clickers with serial connections. RS232 or the like. All the clickers would plug into a networked serial hub device (such as a RocketPort or DeviceMaster) , each clicker would be on it's own virtual serial port on the server or instuctor's computer. The "unique" ID part is covered by the serial port ID. Reading from a serial port buffer is simple to code for. I do it all the time for Windows apps. Setup a control array of serial ports in your app. A single "OnComm" event is triggered when a port recieves data, and the index is passed in which tells the code what serial port (and hence what clicker) sent the data. It wouldn't take but a few minutes of playing with a clicker to know exactly what data each button on it sends when pressed.
No shit. It took me all of 2 tries to memorize where the location of the "x" was that closed the tabs. It makes perfects sense where it is, having it up top would be confusing at best. And if I had 12 tabs open, I'd have to hit that damn button 12 times to close program. Stupid.
Slashdot Mirror
(And they're less likely to take the afternoon off to marry their sister).
Yeah, they're busy taking the day off to throw acid in their wives' faces for getting unsatifactory dowries.
We've got a 25 yr old Mexican Red-headed parrot that's a holy terror. He's not big, a little larger than a cockatiel, but he's a mean bastard. The thing loves my wife, gets all cudly and shit, but anyone else that comes near the cage, and he's out trying to tear you apart. Took a chunk out of the cat once, and the cat won't go near that room anymore.
they're tying to enforce a EULA on 3rd and 4th parties. Who the hell installs keyloggers on their own computer? Obviously, the "user" of the software is installing this discretely on someone else's computer. So the EULA is trying to prevent this 3rd party from scanning and removing the illicitely installed software, and trying to prevent the 4th party (anti-spyware/virus vendors) from facilitating the 3rd party in keeping their machine clean.
And if a piece of software is installed without my permission on my own computer, I'm sure as hell not bound by any EULA's. This is really a moronic attempt to legitimize their malware.
The next trend in internet worms: hidden EULA's to prevent AV software from removing them?
I interpret this as good news. It means you should be free to modify stuff you bought to make it do your bidding regardless of what the copyright owner may want you to do with it.
I agree here. But I'm thinking more along the lines of game modding and related sites being safer from harassment with this ruling. Or any other kind of modification of software that I purchased. As I see it, after I buy it I'm free to tinker with my copy as much as I feel like it. So long as I don't break any other laws in the process, such as selling modified copies or something.
We had our photographer taking digital pics at ours, and she then gave us a CD of all of them.
I doubt we'll have any future problems getting them printed or otherwise used how we choose. Well, so far we've had no problems getting print copies made.
?? why doesn't MS give out the source code to Office or Windows to it's clients?
I can't see it ever getting to that point. Even if it did, I'd be buying black market PC components from Europe/Japan with no TCP chips/devices. And/or wait for the crack to come out.
If you're reasonably ticked that you can't legally get around encrypted files to get at the media you've bought,
Bah, who cares about that? DMCA hasn't stopped me from getting to my media.
The real problem is when printer companies start using the DMCA to try and prevent other companies from making accessories (ink cartridges) for their printers. When console companies use the DMCA to say that installing a modchip onto a piece of hardware you own is illegal.
So whoop-ti-do about DRM, there will always be a way around that. Generally sourced from a country not under jurisdiction of this draconian law. My concern is with all the companies that would love to spin the law for their own purposes, when it was not designed for that.
Case in point, I taught my 5 yr old to use Photoshop to draw pictures. She doesn't understand anything about layers, and isn't good at selecting areas, but just watch her change colors, brush shapes/sizes (using the new right-click functionality of CS no less), the eraser... She works it as well as she does MS Paint. Better really, as she can get creative with the brush shapes. Having everything in toolbars as icons helps, as she can't read yet.
Only the more advanced features of the program are tricky to learn. But the features most photographers probably use are laid out pretty obviously.
I've had t-mobile for about 5 years now. Never had a problem of any kind.
So either the service is just way different in my areas (had it in both S FL and KY), or your buddy is just exagerrating.
So everytime I run, hop, skip, or jump (or otherwise walk differently than "normal") my phone is going to ask for a password?
Yeah, sounds like a feature I'm dying to have.
I'd bet, phone mfgr's make almost all of their phone sales through carriers. The carriers decide which phones they want to sell to customers. If Motorola made a version of the phone which included all the nifty features, and no way to disable them by carriers, do you think Verizon would sell that phone in it's stores? I doubt it. They're bastards.
This is one more thing I like about GSM. I don't have to buy a phone branded for my carrier. I can buy one that's only sold in Europe, and so long as it's tri-band, I can pop in my SIMM and use all the features the phone supports, whether T-Mobile likes it or not. I'm sure they hate the fact that I can copy ringtones and pictures directly to my phone from the PC, they make no extra money off of me.
I guess I'm "stealing" from them. Heh.
That's the cost of serving content on the internet. Unless your site is a pay site, and says so, you cannot expect to make money off of random visitors. You put up a site knowing that hosting, bandwidth, and content are going to cost a certain amount, and I think any website based on a business model of getting paid simply by ad views was made to fail. This is not radio, TV, or print. Your consumers aren't obligated (or rather forced) to view/listen to your paid ads. I can't skip an ad on radio. But I sure would if I could. Same with TV. I hate commercials. I would live in my own little ad-free world if it were possible.
Since I can skip ads on websites, I do. I don't care whether they're annoying or not, obtrusive or not, or even relevant to the page. I don't want to see them. If I want to buy a product, I'll go look for that product. If you want to make money from me to help pay for your website, sell something I might want. Make the site subscription based... if the content is good enough I'd pay. But understand that the old days of getting paid by mandatory ad viewing are over.
You can't make the internet in the image of TV, it's not the same and never will be.
The day we have unbiased news, is the day we have computers writing the news reports for us. :)
And even then, I'd wonder if the bias of the software developers who wrote the news reporting software was somehow being reflected.
No, FIRST he clicked the link (in a normal browser), made a donation, and THEN when he got scared he used Lynx to try to look around.
Is this really all that hard to follow?
I don't care if it's "theft", piracy, or fucking murder anymore.
Not one more cent is going into the pockets of the industry from me.
And I guess if I photocopy some pages from a book at the library/bookstore, that's theft too?
Since I have it, should have purchased it, but didn't.
The difference is, there are actually laws against "pretending" to sell drugs.
Why? Because even though you aren't selling drugs, you are scamming people, which is then theft.
Since downloading a movie is not (yet) a criminal offense, the worst they could do is try to sue you. I'm just not sure the court would award them damages in a case where they actually incurred no damages. Attempting to infringe a copyright and failing is not the same liability as actually infringing that copyright. Unless the court just wanted to "teach them a lesson".
Exactly. If they can't be held liable for "entrapment" by pretending to offer their own copyrighted works and tempting people to download them by placing them onto a filesharing network, then anyone who downloads this "fake" file can't be held on copyright infringement, because no copyright was ever actually infringed.
And I don't think "attempted copyright infringement" is a law on the books yet.
Whoever modded this "troll" jumped the gun. :)
He's right. It's worth $4-5 bucks to get a better rip, faster, than it is to wait a few hours for a crap quality rip to download.
And then you'll be sure to get one the language of your choice, and without Chinese/French/Korean subtitles through the whole thing.
I agree, it won't be very effective. I've already seen it going on for a couple weeks now. I use Azureus with safepeer, and I know that if I start a torrent download and suddenly get 15 blocked IP's by safepeer, something is not right. Usually SP will block the IP's of every seeder of that torrent, thus preventing me from downloading any of it. A sure sign to drop the download, inform the site listing the torrent/tracker, and find a different copy of that torrent. Generally the site will drop the torrent and ban the tracker that listed it within hours.
Unfortunately for the **AA's, user feedback will probably quash this method pretty quickly, unlike on the Kazaa network where it worked quite well.
It's not criminally illegal, but civil. So you can't be arrested (except under specific circustances) but you can be sued.
It becomes criminal infringement if you make money off of doing it, or are part of an organized ring that deals in piracy.
Although, IANAL.
I realized after posting, OP was looking for a wireless solution. Oh well.
This could work as a partially wired system, however. The clickers are wired to the serial hubs, but make the serial hubs on 802.11 connections.
and that would be pretty simple to implement and code, would be to use clickers with serial connections. RS232 or the like. All the clickers would plug into a networked serial hub device (such as a RocketPort or DeviceMaster) , each clicker would be on it's own virtual serial port on the server or instuctor's computer. The "unique" ID part is covered by the serial port ID. Reading from a serial port buffer is simple to code for. I do it all the time for Windows apps. Setup a control array of serial ports in your app. A single "OnComm" event is triggered when a port recieves data, and the index is passed in which tells the code what serial port (and hence what clicker) sent the data. It wouldn't take but a few minutes of playing with a clicker to know exactly what data each button on it sends when pressed.
heh, just blew this story apart. /. is reporting email hoaxes as articles?
So now
No shit. It took me all of 2 tries to memorize where the location of the "x" was that closed the tabs. It makes perfects sense where it is, having it up top would be confusing at best.
And if I had 12 tabs open, I'd have to hit that damn button 12 times to close program. Stupid.