How to correctly read this story...
Kamiza Ikioi writes "This Article tells of an DRM chip that, once installed in your computer (and not by your choice), will allow any Artist you listen to, to "read" your identity. The article goes on to describe how many benefits there are for using this to facilitate online music business and even suggests some negative points, like not being directly implanted in your wallet. It ends with 'Ultimately the DRM itself isn't inherently profitable or not. It will depend entirely on how it's abused, and in that sphere, market and police forces will be more important than technology.'" Well we all know what that means:
1. Install Identity Chips
2. Convince all open P2P formats to support them by using recent Grokster decision (if you don't use it, you are promoting piracy).
3....
4. Profit!
I didn't even catch this story until I read a post from George Lambert (owner of PodKey). I've read exactly what went on (http://www.unsignedpodcast.blogspot.com/): Erik Marcus signed up for a service. The service is a podcast feed keyword. Basically, you choose the keywords for your podcast, and someone can type them in and get podcasts for that keyword. Then, Erik goes apeshit: OMFG, d00d, vegan.com pwns mah rss copyright!!!1!
Little does this idiot realize at the time... he was the one that signed up for this service, which authorized PodKey to do exactly what it did, help him out: "I went to their website with the understanding that it was one of a large number of sites containing directories of podcasts. If podkeyword.com boosted my traffic, fantastic. ( http://vegan.com/issues/2005/podjacking.htm )"
But, George goes ahead an honors his request, and removes the guys podcast. Then, Erik goes apeshit again: OMMFG WTF, not k00l, I lost 75% of my peeps cause j00 delisted meh! YOU HAVE TO FIX THIS! Put it all back, but on top of that, you can't let anyone else but Yahoo and iTunes look at the feed! Then, I'll make them change to my feed, and you have to again drop your lists! YOU MUST DO THIS BECAUSE... uh... YOU OWE ME FOR... errr... uh... BEING A MEAT EATER!
George replies simply: You can re-register yourself like you did the first time. You will get the same service. If you want terms other than what I'm willing to offer, I'll have to recode my website. I will not do that without compensation. If you aren't willing to do that, then you have the two choices of any podcaster: list with my free service and I'll ensure you are easily found by those looking for your type of podcast, or... don't.
Erik goes apeshit one last time: OMFG, d00d, I'm getting a lawyer, and a reporter, and Jesse Jackson, and a legion of bloggers and podcasters that will ignore the facts for me, and we're going to sue and slander your ass all over the net for this unjustificationation of podjacking!
So, it's all relatively simple. Erik wants his RSS feed copyrighted against, who? *!suprise!* His own actions! While at the same time, wanting the benefits and popularity of PodKey, while demanding that PodKey (a free service) bow to his personal demands... but only for as long as it takes him to ditch the PodKey service. He isn't getting his way, so he's making a big PR thing out of it.
Or, to summarize. Erik (aka the author of this article, Schlemphfer) is being a dick (an all veggie one, of course*), and a rather childish one at that. George, on the other hand, is a programmer just trying to run VOLUNTARY service to benefit podcasters. God forbid he doesn't let every disgruntled podcaster tell him how to rewrite his website code.
I've got a new word for all of you. SlashdotJacking - Passing off the jerking off of your own egotistic sob story as a legitimate Slashdot Story.
* Erik would never be a meaty dick, not being the author of Meat Market - "Meat Market: Animals, Ethics and Money is a quick read, but a valuable one. I can't remember the last time I read an animal rights book that excited me so much." -- Herbivore Magazine. Yes, rivveting!
I don't know how each and every municipality handles car registration and plating. But, where I live, if you paint your car a different color than what is on the registration, you must update the registration or face fines/impoundment. If the cop looks up your plates, and it says red, but he sees blue... he's going to pull you over. This will keep happening until you A) lose your car, or B) a court decides in your favor that you somehow have the legal right to have "mood paint". I highly doubt B will happen. I've seen enough problems with friends back in high school trying to defend window tint (only to be forced by a cop to rip it out right there on the spot).
Courts rarely seem favor the car modifier when arguments of public safety and the needs of law enforcement to do their jobs are in question. Accommodating the driver's taste in paint is not on the court's priority list. Accurate registrations for law enforcement would outweigh taste. You're about as likely to convince a judge you can legally use Spray-On Mud ( http://www.wired.com/news/autotech/0,2554,67794,00 .html ) around/near your license plate or windows.
Which proves him right, that the article summary which says.004%, not.004, is wrong. They probably meant.004 (.04%), but that is not what they wrote. I wouldn't want you doing MY taxes in such mistyped Excel spreadsheets. I'd rather get a penalty of.004% instead of.004 due to misreading my statements. Come back when you put your glasses on maybe. 8)
Exactly. I dumped a recent Linux install in favor of Windows just for USB Webcam support. The system was for a small media center + teleconferencing with family. My distro was requiring me to recompile the kernel for Webcam support. Not exactly "plug-and-play". While compiling a kernel may not be difficult, I compare having to do this with rebuilding your car's engine just to change the radio station. It also had problems supporting the TV output on the system, and problems with several wireless cards.
Linux must become fully plug-and-play, or it will never ever become a desktop of choice for the average user. Whether it is coding more generic drivers, or forcing vendors to support Linux, or both, it must be done.
I've found Linux to be the best choice in servers. I've also found it to be the choice for desktops if that desktop happens to be a system that only connects to generic hardware, a generic lan card, and you aren't sharing that desktop with anyone computer illiterate. Anything else, and its pot luck.
I've heard it over and over... someone has their mother using linux and loving it. Well, your mother is a rocket scientest compared to mine and all the other ones I know who still don't know what a right click is. Recompiling a kernel is a taaaaaad out of their league.
"That helped Microsoft immensely because at the time people liked the fact that they could share content using cut/copy/paste."
That was then, this is now, enter the DMCA and DRM... Cut/Copy/Paste will get you 5 years now, and Microsoft again profits immensely, only its not helping users one bit. Now, I've got to change my identity to hide from ravenous Senators just for quoting you without including a bibliography with my post.
I wasn't particularly laughing at this idea... and I don't think anyone at Google was either. Is Google turning the Internet into one massive grid computer with these super tankers of silicon by strategically placing them at all the main intersections of the Internet? I dunno, but I do know that Google has some serious cluster computing geniuses who've had an itch to scratch. Don't Google employees get 40% time to work on their own projects or something like that? This is probably the hardware guys' 40%.
The possibilities here are endless. Even mundane ideas could be very revolutionary. Forget Blogger, what if Google actually comes out with full web hosting and wireless connectivity in major cities around these hubs? A great many businesses would fall to that giant, especially considering they could possibly do all the hosting for free by placing AdSense on all pages. Don't discount this idea at all... Google just introduced free DB hosting of sorts. Jumping into hosting a few programmable web languages might not be that great of a stretch for them now.
I'm just wondering when we'll stop calling it The Internet, and start calling it The Google.
Search for Ikioi on Google, MSN, Yahoo, take your pick. (Not yet an entry in H2G2.) I'm obscure and #1! Hmm, not sure if that was a fair trade off...
I think there is a fairly straight forward relationship between rating and specialization, and it has everything to do with competition. And, obscurity is the best way to avoid competition. For instance, the top results are still funny for something so utterly obscure as "French Military Victories".
In the good ol' USofA, there is no technically clear in civil litigation. All you have to prove is something as simple as your reasonable expectations. Doesn't matter what the EULA says or if they did anything illegal.
IANAL, but it is my impression that in the eyes of the US courts, you not only have to follow the letter of the law, but you have to ensure that you are conveying a reasonable perception about what your product does. That fine print means nothing if the court finds it too difficult to read, or makes unfair claims (ie - By installing this, you transfer ownership of your computer to us... which is what a rootkit comes closest to without physical possession.)
Civil cases aren't really about the law. They're about damages, and a propoderance of evidence (more than 50% in your favor... a lot less than the reasonable doubt standard of a criminal trial). It may not be against the law for you to spraypaint your trees pink. But if I'm your neighbor and plan on selling my home, I have every right to sue you for damaging the property value of my home. Getting a few other neighbors to testify, and it'll win just on proponderance of evidence.
IMHO, I'd sue the hell out of Sony in a class action lawsuit. Look at it this way: you may not win a lot of money each, but it'll probably be enough to repurchase that CD and a few others with no DRM.
Because it was considered by just about every scientist alive at the time of Apollo that there was absolutely no scientific value in sending a man to the Moon. Not just British scientists but Americian scientists too held this opinion. Many still hold this opinion today.
I agree. I mean, why send people into space. After all, don't those satellites fix themselves. Hubble almost certainly has required no human interaction. Even if it did, it was of no scientific value. Obviously sending and/or building on our only natural satellite could only end up just as fruitless. And, sex only for the purpose of procreation. Otherwise it has no value. Jam on toast? I'll take the dry white toast any day! Computers for the common peasant, but what would they need with a computer?
Yes, that's sarcasm. If it wasn't, someone shoot me.
An unimaginative scientist that can't find the scientific value in the exploration of the unknown... I think that disqualifies them for the title "scientist". One can argue the cost all day, but to argue the scientific value of exploration... unscientific exploration is the very definition of oxymoron. It is, I looked it up and everything.
The simplest trick I remember was to use the innerhtml property of hidden divs, and write var data there, and then use a timer in the JS to load it up.
I still use that trick as it's a good replacement for session cookies when you really don't want to code a any backend scripts or mess with cookies for some little "play page".
I was going to joke about how long I've been waiting for Duke Nukem Forever and TeamFortress 2... then I looked at the Perl Release History. My god, I've lost my virginity, been engaged 3 different times, went through highschool, went through college, lived in 6 different houses, had about 15 different cars, had about 20 different jobs, and travelled to another continent in since Perl 5 first appeared. And I thought IE7 was a long time in coming!
Some fun facts about 1993, the first appearance of Perl 5 (from Wikipedia - 1993):
In Moscow, George H. W. Bush and Boris Yeltsin sign the second Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START).
Washington State executes Westley Allan Dodd by hanging (the first legal hanging in America since 1965)
For the first time, Martin Luther King Jr. holiday is officially observed in all 50 American states.
Bill Clinton succeeds George H. W. Bush as President of the United States of America.
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms agents raid the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas with a warrant to arrest cult leader David Koresh on federal firearms violations. Four agents and five Davidians die in the raid and a 51-day standoff begins.
Rodney King testifies at the federal trial of four Los Angeles, California police officers accused of violating King's civil rights when they beat him during an arrest.
A bug in a program written by Richard Depew sends an article to 200 newsgroups simultaneously. The term spamming is coined by Joel Furr to describe the incident.
The World Wide Web was born at CERN.
War on Drugs: Colombian drug lord Pablo Escobar is gunned down in Medellín when police tries to arrest him.
I doubt there is a single person here who didn't think, "hmmm I could use one of these in my cubicle."
Just those of us without cubicles. I was thinking more along the lines of, "hmmm, I could use one of these , but with a taser gun, mounted on the roof of my vehicle to shoot small animals that want to put paw prints all over it." Then I was thinking, "hmmm, I wonder if anyone from PETA is going to read this post."
"Its not just for XML and its not just a J language either... Ruby will do."
No, XML isn't really a requirement of functionality. If by J you mean a Java backend, you are correct, but not if you mean Javascript Without Javascript you cannot have AJAX-like functionality unless you use a plugin or browser addon like JRE, Flash, etc.
I just wanted to clarify this point to those who might take that statement the wrong way. Coding something in C++ that talks to a server is not AJAX, for instance. AJAX, imho, is defined by 3 characteristics.
1. AJAX involves dynamic content, not static content. This means that there is a seemless interaction, without the application appearing to "reload".
2. AJAX involves a stand alone web browser or an embeded web browser that is running the common scripting language Javascript.
3. AJAX involves data retrival from a source outside of the client-side application itself, and does not solely use data embedded in the application itself.
I could refine those a bit, but I think the general ideas come across. So, really, a Java applet embeded in your browser that talks to the server, such as an IRC chat client, is not AJAX, though it may provide AJAX-like functionality. The language of the backend is irrelevant; the data formats are irrelevant. The only relevance, really, is that you are taking something that has generally been static (web pages) and made the operate like a fully functioning application. It's the transition from "Information" (HTML) to "Application" (AJAX).
The definition really can't go beyond this. If it isn't limitted to seemless dynamic content, you could call any webpage that contained Javascript AJAX. If it isn't limitted to browsers and Javascript, then you could call an SSH program, chat applet, multiplayer game XBOX game, etc. "AJAX clients". If it isn't limitted to outside data, then you'd have to call Javascript clocks AJAX. An application must (at least) satisfy these three conditions before it can be called AJAX. If it doesn't, it may still be a really good interactive and dynamic application, though not AJAX.
The core of AJAX, XMLHttpRequest, is the only place I think the term XML is validated in the AJAX acronym. And, certainly, you can load any type of data you wish with it. If there was any single thing to define AJAX, it is this command. Without it (or something like it coded in a round about way... who knows, some people like the challenge) you cannot satisfy all 3 conditions.
That may be completely true. But, often times, we just like someone to listen. Take Eliza for example. People have obcessed (and some still do) over "her". She was pretty dumb, but smart enough to just keep the conversation going.
It's like talking to yourself, which seems pointless, unless you consider that most people talk to themselves to work through things anyways. Having an actual robot might breath new life into Eliza, but adding some movements, facial expressions, and a humanoid body; where as there is no confusing a computer with a computer.
Besides, people paid cold cash for pet rocks and sea monkeys, so it doesn't exactly take a genius to give something meaning that logically should not. It's just a new coat of paint on a program that hasn't really been upgraded by any significance. The #1 chat bot to date is A.L.I.C.E., and it's nothing more than Eliza on XML. Still, it's impressive how much we can fool ourselves with it, especially if it understood speech and had a face.
I had a bot called Hal once. I also have some Dragon Speech software. The great thing about Hal was that he could perform tasks, like check the weather, read e-mail, or look up phone numbers. Using speech recognition, I could litterally talk with my computer (throwing in the occasional "Enter.")
And while this would impress nobody on/., it never failed to impress those who don't really care how the "trick" is pulled off. Everyone talks/yells/whines to their computer. Nobody usually expects it to answer them. I only removed the setup for 2 reasons. Speech recognition ate up a ton of space and cpu, and Hal was not easily programmable. Other than that, if I could have it back, I most certainly would. It would be nice to ask another "Hal" questions to look up on Google while I wrote out my replies here.
"Hey, Hal, what's the link to the Alice Chat Bot? Copy that to the clipboard."
"offering a range of electronic-age valet services"
I read valet as escort, and escort as call-girl, and call-girl as hooker.
TFA is not loading, but if this looks anything like this recently unveiled robot... come on, it's a sex bot. They always talk about how the robots will cook, clean, watch children and the elderly. But, cut through the BS, and lets be honest. It's a sex bot that everyone is really waiting for. People want a Real Doll that can actually "perform".
Sure, they'll make robots to do everything. But, I don't think I'm being careless in saying that every technilogical advancement had sex as its goal, and as its pioneering breakthrough.
The average person knew about the net not when Amazon founded a virtual bookstore, not when eBay opened an online auction, not when news organizations and research because infinitely easier online... The average person knew about the net when their friends, kids, or spouse started downloading porn.
The average person will not really get into robots, until they can really "get into" robots, if you know what I mean. After all, aren't all of our most expensive toys those which we either can have sex in or which can get us sex? Geeks are not excluded from that statement with their computers. God knows we have enough combined porn on our harddrives to make Seymore Butts look like an amature... and what old school geek didn't have at least one of the original Leasure Suit Larry games.
When robots can have sex, you'll see one in every home. That doesn't mean they'll all be sex bots, but I think sex bots will usher in more acceptance, especially since such bots will ultimately make the key breakthroughs in human interaction. Realistically, sex is the ultimate 1-on-1 test of a robot. I think humans may just not be comfortable with a thing until it can be connected to intimately. I dunno if that's because we instictually have to mark our territory, or because in the end, sex is an ultimate emotional bond. I suppose both statements may be true, especially depending on the sex of the person.
Doc: Matry! You have to come back with my to 1985 to reverse engineer Quantum Link. I've wired the flux capacitor to an old Commodore 64, and we only have until the data cassette tape reaches the end!
Marty: But why must we reverse engineer Quantum Link, Doc?
Doc: Because Marty, when we originally time travelled, a young man saw us fly into the ether, and it inspired him to create what would become America Online. Then, years later, your granddaughter will proclaim in one of their commercials that she is a "chat queen".
Marty: So does it kill her or something?
Doc: No, Marty! I just hate that #$%damn commercial!
Couldn't live without at least 2 monitors, but the RAIC is simple enough, and even better on 2 monitors. I love to run two computers simultaniously, with a full screen VNC on one of the monitors (VNC'ing to slower machine). This way, I can work on both at all times. And, because the monitors are hooked up to the faster machine, I can overlay 2x the work (remember, you can drag Machine #1 program windows over the top of the VNC of Machine #2).
Especially if I have to do something like rsync restore file backups on my remote server, I'll use the VNC for this, and continue working on the fast machine, but still monitoring the VNC.
The great thing about 2 monitors is when using multiple computers. I even find that if I just need to work on any remote machine, making one full screen my SSH, while the other is either chat/web/OO/e-mail allows me to collaborate much more efficiently with tons more real estate, and without going blind with ultra-high resolutions.
My home office setup:
Desktop - 2.8Ghz, 1GB ram desktop, 120GB storage on 80/40GB harddrives, dual-boot Fedora/XP, the machine with 2 monitors.
Laptop - 1Ghz, 256MB ram, 40GB HD, 100% Fedora, the machine I VNC into usually.
Remote Server - 2.0Ghz, 1GB ram, 80GBx2 HD, RHEL, the machine I SSH into usually.
I do 90% of my work while sitting at the Desktop. The other 10% is from the Laptop. But, unless I have a single task, I really don't go without my dual-head monitor setup. I run 2 19" CRT monitors. I'd love to move up to 21" LCD. I'd also like to hit the lottery, buy a jet, and sail around the world. But, don't be fooled. My setup comes with a very high monthly bill of around $200 for all the net connectivity, including having my remote server plugged into a Gigabit backbone. Unless you are actually running a public server, you can forgo such a cost, and LAN a not-so-remote server for file storage, maintenance, firewall, etc. The laptop is great to keep yourself mobile, or if you travel. Otherwise, save the monitor, and just use it like a server when at home. I use mine mostly for beta testing new software and setups before moving them onto my remote production server. It also makes a nice place to rsync critical file backups, so that I have 2 backups at extreme distances from each other, and thus not mutually destructable.
To me, real estate and bandwidth > *. With those, I can always upgrade the cpu's plugged into them cheaper than upgrading either of those.
And, remember one great lesson. You can always LAN an old CPU... you cannot however LAN an old (small, with horrible color) monitor, nor could I imagine why you would anyways. If you can only either afford 1 great monitor, or two mediocre ones, get the 1 great monitor. Then, save up and get another later. Don't worry about the CPU (unless you are under 1Ghz). I would say the same about keyboards and mice. I have an ergonomic keyboard that's still ps/2 connected. I've used it for roughly 5 years, and they don't make it anymore. Some keys have cigarette burns. But, it was the best $50 I ever spent. Same with my 5-button optical mouse (usb). I've had the same high back leather chair for about 6 years. I've had these particular dual monitors for about 4 years. All these things together will plug into whatever actual cpu/ram/hd you purchase. I've been through 3 different desktops in that time, but always with the same addons. And so, since you will likely be with them longer than a CPU, take more time on them than anything. You'll thank yourself 5 years from now when a new cpu would probably be sluggish and out of date, but not the accessories.
And yet, the Internet Archive's Wayback machine has been successfully used in several copyright court cases.
I'm not agreeing or disagreeing that either of these are the best sources. But, if Internet Archive is a valid legal source, then by all means Wikipedia is. (Because it keeps records of page updates as well, so you could trace the entry all the way back to the original post of the entry, as well as identify specific sources of each tidbit of information).
Google... nah, not really. Google is good for finding information, not validating it, imho.
Hey, he asked for it... "I am going to troll the fuck out of slashdot."
So, please, by all means, troll the fuck out of him, heh. Either that, or extremely humorous:
"XP... built from the ground up in the early 1990... without any legacy baggage... available essentially for free... there is no reason to use anything else"
Come on Bill, post without the AC name. You almost sounded like an SCO exec... until you praised XP.
"If a product isn't *near-perfect*, it never leaves beta. Contrast that with MS."
Now now, don't be too critical. We all know that IE 6.0 is definately not perfect. So, like Google leaving a product in beta, they left IE in 6.0. See, 6.0 = MS Beta. 5.0 and under was Alpha. But, they simply discontinued development on an obviously obsolete product until forced to do so. After all, MS has bigger projects than the Internet. The Internet is old news to Microsoft. What's hot is TV. MSNBC is the future! But, they left MSNBC in 5.0, and moved on to consoles, because XBox is the future! Why buy a game for a computer and play online for free forever, when you can buy the same game for your console and play for $20.00 a month on a TV that runs at at lower resolutions than 10 year old monitor?
Come on guys, haven't you had a POS car that you could afford to fix, so you just kinda... duct-taped it for a few more months, or years, or until your grandkids ask you what "Leaded" means?
Believe me, Microsoft has their finger on the button of the future, and the future is Leaded, baby!
I'm sure there are still servers out there... and I'm all for compatability... but really, Gopher, Wais? And, even if you do use them, and would actually e-mail a link to one, why would you be using Yahoo Mail? Wouldn't you be the type more comfortable telnetting into a sendmail server?
I hate to break this guy's bubble, but wouldn't he get the same, if not more, use out of the cat food, than the cat?
I'm probably wrong, but it's obvious enough to at least experiment with. Then again, cat food is expensive... I'd rather by 150 octane gas. Maybe dog food?
If he has to use former-living material as a base, at least use squirrels. Those suckers are everywhere. That, and nobody looks at you (too) funny if you claim to have eaten squirrel. Very in the western cultures claim to eat cats.
(Give me some credit, I avoided any hamster/wheel jokes.)
Slashdot Mirror
How to correctly read this story... Kamiza Ikioi writes "This Article tells of an DRM chip that, once installed in your computer (and not by your choice), will allow any Artist you listen to, to "read" your identity. The article goes on to describe how many benefits there are for using this to facilitate online music business and even suggests some negative points, like not being directly implanted in your wallet. It ends with 'Ultimately the DRM itself isn't inherently profitable or not. It will depend entirely on how it's abused, and in that sphere, market and police forces will be more important than technology.'" Well we all know what that means: 1. Install Identity Chips 2. Convince all open P2P formats to support them by using recent Grokster decision (if you don't use it, you are promoting piracy). 3. ...
4. Profit!
I didn't even catch this story until I read a post from George Lambert (owner of PodKey). I've read exactly what went on (http://www.unsignedpodcast.blogspot.com/): Erik Marcus signed up for a service. The service is a podcast feed keyword. Basically, you choose the keywords for your podcast, and someone can type them in and get podcasts for that keyword. Then, Erik goes apeshit: OMFG, d00d, vegan.com pwns mah rss copyright!!!1!
... errr... uh... BEING A MEAT EATER!
Little does this idiot realize at the time... he was the one that signed up for this service, which authorized PodKey to do exactly what it did, help him out: "I went to their website with the understanding that it was one of a large number of sites containing directories of podcasts. If podkeyword.com boosted my traffic, fantastic. ( http://vegan.com/issues/2005/podjacking.htm )"
But, George goes ahead an honors his request, and removes the guys podcast. Then, Erik goes apeshit again: OMMFG WTF, not k00l, I lost 75% of my peeps cause j00 delisted meh! YOU HAVE TO FIX THIS! Put it all back, but on top of that, you can't let anyone else but Yahoo and iTunes look at the feed! Then, I'll make them change to my feed, and you have to again drop your lists! YOU MUST DO THIS BECAUSE... uh... YOU OWE ME FOR
George replies simply: You can re-register yourself like you did the first time. You will get the same service. If you want terms other than what I'm willing to offer, I'll have to recode my website. I will not do that without compensation. If you aren't willing to do that, then you have the two choices of any podcaster: list with my free service and I'll ensure you are easily found by those looking for your type of podcast, or... don't.
Erik goes apeshit one last time: OMFG, d00d, I'm getting a lawyer, and a reporter, and Jesse Jackson, and a legion of bloggers and podcasters that will ignore the facts for me, and we're going to sue and slander your ass all over the net for this unjustificationation of podjacking!
So, it's all relatively simple. Erik wants his RSS feed copyrighted against, who? *!suprise!* His own actions! While at the same time, wanting the benefits and popularity of PodKey, while demanding that PodKey (a free service) bow to his personal demands... but only for as long as it takes him to ditch the PodKey service. He isn't getting his way, so he's making a big PR thing out of it.
Or, to summarize. Erik (aka the author of this article, Schlemphfer) is being a dick (an all veggie one, of course*), and a rather childish one at that. George, on the other hand, is a programmer just trying to run VOLUNTARY service to benefit podcasters. God forbid he doesn't let every disgruntled podcaster tell him how to rewrite his website code.
I've got a new word for all of you. SlashdotJacking - Passing off the jerking off of your own egotistic sob story as a legitimate Slashdot Story.
* Erik would never be a meaty dick, not being the author of Meat Market - "Meat Market: Animals, Ethics and Money is a quick read, but a valuable one. I can't remember the last time I read an animal rights book that excited me so much." -- Herbivore Magazine. Yes, rivveting!
I don't know how each and every municipality handles car registration and plating. But, where I live, if you paint your car a different color than what is on the registration, you must update the registration or face fines/impoundment. If the cop looks up your plates, and it says red, but he sees blue... he's going to pull you over. This will keep happening until you A) lose your car, or B) a court decides in your favor that you somehow have the legal right to have "mood paint". I highly doubt B will happen. I've seen enough problems with friends back in high school trying to defend window tint (only to be forced by a cop to rip it out right there on the spot).
0 .html ) around/near your license plate or windows.
Courts rarely seem favor the car modifier when arguments of public safety and the needs of law enforcement to do their jobs are in question. Accommodating the driver's taste in paint is not on the court's priority list. Accurate registrations for law enforcement would outweigh taste. You're about as likely to convince a judge you can legally use Spray-On Mud ( http://www.wired.com/news/autotech/0,2554,67794,0
My mistake, thought parent was actually referring to the post of:
1 69789
...which I thought Anon was replying too.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=170011&cid=14
>Seems like good math skills are too. 800,000 computers out of 200 million is WAY more than 0.004% as the summary stated
>Someone is off by a couple orders of magnitude. Much closer to half a percent.
So, yep you're right, completely my mistake.
Which proves him right, that the article summary which says .004%, not .004, is wrong. They probably meant .004 (.04%), but that is not what they wrote. I wouldn't want you doing MY taxes in such mistyped Excel spreadsheets. I'd rather get a penalty of .004% instead of .004 due to misreading my statements. Come back when you put your glasses on maybe. 8)
Exactly. I dumped a recent Linux install in favor of Windows just for USB Webcam support. The system was for a small media center + teleconferencing with family. My distro was requiring me to recompile the kernel for Webcam support. Not exactly "plug-and-play". While compiling a kernel may not be difficult, I compare having to do this with rebuilding your car's engine just to change the radio station. It also had problems supporting the TV output on the system, and problems with several wireless cards.
Linux must become fully plug-and-play, or it will never ever become a desktop of choice for the average user. Whether it is coding more generic drivers, or forcing vendors to support Linux, or both, it must be done.
I've found Linux to be the best choice in servers. I've also found it to be the choice for desktops if that desktop happens to be a system that only connects to generic hardware, a generic lan card, and you aren't sharing that desktop with anyone computer illiterate. Anything else, and its pot luck.
I've heard it over and over... someone has their mother using linux and loving it. Well, your mother is a rocket scientest compared to mine and all the other ones I know who still don't know what a right click is. Recompiling a kernel is a taaaaaad out of their league.
"That helped Microsoft immensely because at the time people liked the fact that they could share content using cut/copy/paste."
That was then, this is now, enter the DMCA and DRM... Cut/Copy/Paste will get you 5 years now, and Microsoft again profits immensely, only its not helping users one bit. Now, I've got to change my identity to hide from ravenous Senators just for quoting you without including a bibliography with my post.
Remember http://www.robinsloan.com/epic/ - The Google Grid? I bet many laughed at such an apparently outragious idea.
I wasn't particularly laughing at this idea... and I don't think anyone at Google was either. Is Google turning the Internet into one massive grid computer with these super tankers of silicon by strategically placing them at all the main intersections of the Internet? I dunno, but I do know that Google has some serious cluster computing geniuses who've had an itch to scratch. Don't Google employees get 40% time to work on their own projects or something like that? This is probably the hardware guys' 40%.
The possibilities here are endless. Even mundane ideas could be very revolutionary. Forget Blogger, what if Google actually comes out with full web hosting and wireless connectivity in major cities around these hubs? A great many businesses would fall to that giant, especially considering they could possibly do all the hosting for free by placing AdSense on all pages. Don't discount this idea at all... Google just introduced free DB hosting of sorts. Jumping into hosting a few programmable web languages might not be that great of a stretch for them now.
I'm just wondering when we'll stop calling it The Internet, and start calling it The Google.
Search for Ikioi on Google, MSN, Yahoo, take your pick. (Not yet an entry in H2G2.) I'm obscure and #1! Hmm, not sure if that was a fair trade off...
I think there is a fairly straight forward relationship between rating and specialization, and it has everything to do with competition. And, obscurity is the best way to avoid competition. For instance, the top results are still funny for something so utterly obscure as "French Military Victories".
"So, technically they are in the clear..."
In the good ol' USofA, there is no technically clear in civil litigation. All you have to prove is something as simple as your reasonable expectations. Doesn't matter what the EULA says or if they did anything illegal.
IANAL, but it is my impression that in the eyes of the US courts, you not only have to follow the letter of the law, but you have to ensure that you are conveying a reasonable perception about what your product does. That fine print means nothing if the court finds it too difficult to read, or makes unfair claims (ie - By installing this, you transfer ownership of your computer to us... which is what a rootkit comes closest to without physical possession.)
Civil cases aren't really about the law. They're about damages, and a propoderance of evidence (more than 50% in your favor... a lot less than the reasonable doubt standard of a criminal trial). It may not be against the law for you to spraypaint your trees pink. But if I'm your neighbor and plan on selling my home, I have every right to sue you for damaging the property value of my home. Getting a few other neighbors to testify, and it'll win just on proponderance of evidence.
IMHO, I'd sue the hell out of Sony in a class action lawsuit. Look at it this way: you may not win a lot of money each, but it'll probably be enough to repurchase that CD and a few others with no DRM.
Because it was considered by just about every scientist alive at the time of Apollo that there was absolutely no scientific value in sending a man to the Moon. Not just British scientists but Americian scientists too held this opinion. Many still hold this opinion today.
I agree. I mean, why send people into space. After all, don't those satellites fix themselves. Hubble almost certainly has required no human interaction. Even if it did, it was of no scientific value. Obviously sending and/or building on our only natural satellite could only end up just as fruitless. And, sex only for the purpose of procreation. Otherwise it has no value. Jam on toast? I'll take the dry white toast any day! Computers for the common peasant, but what would they need with a computer?
Yes, that's sarcasm. If it wasn't, someone shoot me.
An unimaginative scientist that can't find the scientific value in the exploration of the unknown... I think that disqualifies them for the title "scientist". One can argue the cost all day, but to argue the scientific value of exploration... unscientific exploration is the very definition of oxymoron. It is, I looked it up and everything.
The simplest trick I remember was to use the innerhtml property of hidden divs, and write var data there, and then use a timer in the JS to load it up.
I still use that trick as it's a good replacement for session cookies when you really don't want to code a any backend scripts or mess with cookies for some little "play page".
I was going to joke about how long I've been waiting for Duke Nukem Forever and TeamFortress 2... then I looked at the Perl Release History. My god, I've lost my virginity, been engaged 3 different times, went through highschool, went through college, lived in 6 different houses, had about 15 different cars, had about 20 different jobs, and travelled to another continent in since Perl 5 first appeared. And I thought IE7 was a long time in coming!
Some fun facts about 1993, the first appearance of Perl 5 (from Wikipedia - 1993):
In Moscow, George H. W. Bush and Boris Yeltsin sign the second Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START).
Washington State executes Westley Allan Dodd by hanging (the first legal hanging in America since 1965)
For the first time, Martin Luther King Jr. holiday is officially observed in all 50 American states.
Bill Clinton succeeds George H. W. Bush as President of the United States of America.
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms agents raid the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas with a warrant to arrest cult leader David Koresh on federal firearms violations. Four agents and five Davidians die in the raid and a 51-day standoff begins.
Rodney King testifies at the federal trial of four Los Angeles, California police officers accused of violating King's civil rights when they beat him during an arrest.
A bug in a program written by Richard Depew sends an article to 200 newsgroups simultaneously. The term spamming is coined by Joel Furr to describe the incident.
The World Wide Web was born at CERN.
War on Drugs: Colombian drug lord Pablo Escobar is gunned down in Medellín when police tries to arrest him.
And, of course, Perl 5 alpha first appears.
I doubt there is a single person here who didn't think, "hmmm I could use one of these in my cubicle."
Just those of us without cubicles. I was thinking more along the lines of, "hmmm, I could use one of these , but with a taser gun, mounted on the roof of my vehicle to shoot small animals that want to put paw prints all over it." Then I was thinking, "hmmm, I wonder if anyone from PETA is going to read this post."
"Its not just for XML and its not just a J language either... Ruby will do."
No, XML isn't really a requirement of functionality. If by J you mean a Java backend, you are correct, but not if you mean Javascript Without Javascript you cannot have AJAX-like functionality unless you use a plugin or browser addon like JRE, Flash, etc.
I just wanted to clarify this point to those who might take that statement the wrong way. Coding something in C++ that talks to a server is not AJAX, for instance. AJAX, imho, is defined by 3 characteristics.
1. AJAX involves dynamic content, not static content. This means that there is a seemless interaction, without the application appearing to "reload".
2. AJAX involves a stand alone web browser or an embeded web browser that is running the common scripting language Javascript.
3. AJAX involves data retrival from a source outside of the client-side application itself, and does not solely use data embedded in the application itself.
I could refine those a bit, but I think the general ideas come across. So, really, a Java applet embeded in your browser that talks to the server, such as an IRC chat client, is not AJAX, though it may provide AJAX-like functionality. The language of the backend is irrelevant; the data formats are irrelevant. The only relevance, really, is that you are taking something that has generally been static (web pages) and made the operate like a fully functioning application. It's the transition from "Information" (HTML) to "Application" (AJAX).
The definition really can't go beyond this. If it isn't limitted to seemless dynamic content, you could call any webpage that contained Javascript AJAX. If it isn't limitted to browsers and Javascript, then you could call an SSH program, chat applet, multiplayer game XBOX game, etc. "AJAX clients". If it isn't limitted to outside data, then you'd have to call Javascript clocks AJAX. An application must (at least) satisfy these three conditions before it can be called AJAX. If it doesn't, it may still be a really good interactive and dynamic application, though not AJAX.
The core of AJAX, XMLHttpRequest, is the only place I think the term XML is validated in the AJAX acronym. And, certainly, you can load any type of data you wish with it. If there was any single thing to define AJAX, it is this command. Without it (or something like it coded in a round about way... who knows, some people like the challenge) you cannot satisfy all 3 conditions.
That may be completely true. But, often times, we just like someone to listen. Take Eliza for example. People have obcessed (and some still do) over "her". She was pretty dumb, but smart enough to just keep the conversation going.
/., it never failed to impress those who don't really care how the "trick" is pulled off. Everyone talks/yells/whines to their computer. Nobody usually expects it to answer them. I only removed the setup for 2 reasons. Speech recognition ate up a ton of space and cpu, and Hal was not easily programmable. Other than that, if I could have it back, I most certainly would. It would be nice to ask another "Hal" questions to look up on Google while I wrote out my replies here.
It's like talking to yourself, which seems pointless, unless you consider that most people talk to themselves to work through things anyways. Having an actual robot might breath new life into Eliza, but adding some movements, facial expressions, and a humanoid body; where as there is no confusing a computer with a computer.
Besides, people paid cold cash for pet rocks and sea monkeys, so it doesn't exactly take a genius to give something meaning that logically should not. It's just a new coat of paint on a program that hasn't really been upgraded by any significance. The #1 chat bot to date is A.L.I.C.E., and it's nothing more than Eliza on XML. Still, it's impressive how much we can fool ourselves with it, especially if it understood speech and had a face.
I had a bot called Hal once. I also have some Dragon Speech software. The great thing about Hal was that he could perform tasks, like check the weather, read e-mail, or look up phone numbers. Using speech recognition, I could litterally talk with my computer (throwing in the occasional "Enter.")
And while this would impress nobody on
"Hey, Hal, what's the link to the Alice Chat Bot? Copy that to the clipboard."
Doh, no Hal, you'll have to look it up yourself.
"offering a range of electronic-age valet services"
I read valet as escort, and escort as call-girl, and call-girl as hooker.
TFA is not loading, but if this looks anything like this recently unveiled robot... come on, it's a sex bot. They always talk about how the robots will cook, clean, watch children and the elderly. But, cut through the BS, and lets be honest. It's a sex bot that everyone is really waiting for. People want a Real Doll that can actually "perform".
Sure, they'll make robots to do everything. But, I don't think I'm being careless in saying that every technilogical advancement had sex as its goal, and as its pioneering breakthrough.
The average person knew about the net not when Amazon founded a virtual bookstore, not when eBay opened an online auction, not when news organizations and research because infinitely easier online... The average person knew about the net when their friends, kids, or spouse started downloading porn.
The average person will not really get into robots, until they can really "get into" robots, if you know what I mean. After all, aren't all of our most expensive toys those which we either can have sex in or which can get us sex? Geeks are not excluded from that statement with their computers. God knows we have enough combined porn on our harddrives to make Seymore Butts look like an amature... and what old school geek didn't have at least one of the original Leasure Suit Larry games.
When robots can have sex, you'll see one in every home. That doesn't mean they'll all be sex bots, but I think sex bots will usher in more acceptance, especially since such bots will ultimately make the key breakthroughs in human interaction. Realistically, sex is the ultimate 1-on-1 test of a robot. I think humans may just not be comfortable with a thing until it can be connected to intimately. I dunno if that's because we instictually have to mark our territory, or because in the end, sex is an ultimate emotional bond. I suppose both statements may be true, especially depending on the sex of the person.
Doc: Matry! You have to come back with my to 1985 to reverse engineer Quantum Link. I've wired the flux capacitor to an old Commodore 64, and we only have until the data cassette tape reaches the end!
Marty: But why must we reverse engineer Quantum Link, Doc?
Doc: Because Marty, when we originally time travelled, a young man saw us fly into the ether, and it inspired him to create what would become America Online. Then, years later, your granddaughter will proclaim in one of their commercials that she is a "chat queen".
Marty: So does it kill her or something?
Doc: No, Marty! I just hate that #$%damn commercial!
Couldn't live without at least 2 monitors, but the RAIC is simple enough, and even better on 2 monitors. I love to run two computers simultaniously, with a full screen VNC on one of the monitors (VNC'ing to slower machine). This way, I can work on both at all times. And, because the monitors are hooked up to the faster machine, I can overlay 2x the work (remember, you can drag Machine #1 program windows over the top of the VNC of Machine #2).
Especially if I have to do something like rsync restore file backups on my remote server, I'll use the VNC for this, and continue working on the fast machine, but still monitoring the VNC.
The great thing about 2 monitors is when using multiple computers. I even find that if I just need to work on any remote machine, making one full screen my SSH, while the other is either chat/web/OO/e-mail allows me to collaborate much more efficiently with tons more real estate, and without going blind with ultra-high resolutions.
My home office setup:
Desktop - 2.8Ghz, 1GB ram desktop, 120GB storage on 80/40GB harddrives, dual-boot Fedora/XP, the machine with 2 monitors.
Laptop - 1Ghz, 256MB ram, 40GB HD, 100% Fedora, the machine I VNC into usually.
Remote Server - 2.0Ghz, 1GB ram, 80GBx2 HD, RHEL, the machine I SSH into usually.
I do 90% of my work while sitting at the Desktop. The other 10% is from the Laptop. But, unless I have a single task, I really don't go without my dual-head monitor setup. I run 2 19" CRT monitors. I'd love to move up to 21" LCD. I'd also like to hit the lottery, buy a jet, and sail around the world. But, don't be fooled. My setup comes with a very high monthly bill of around $200 for all the net connectivity, including having my remote server plugged into a Gigabit backbone. Unless you are actually running a public server, you can forgo such a cost, and LAN a not-so-remote server for file storage, maintenance, firewall, etc. The laptop is great to keep yourself mobile, or if you travel. Otherwise, save the monitor, and just use it like a server when at home. I use mine mostly for beta testing new software and setups before moving them onto my remote production server. It also makes a nice place to rsync critical file backups, so that I have 2 backups at extreme distances from each other, and thus not mutually destructable.
To me, real estate and bandwidth > *. With those, I can always upgrade the cpu's plugged into them cheaper than upgrading either of those.
And, remember one great lesson. You can always LAN an old CPU... you cannot however LAN an old (small, with horrible color) monitor, nor could I imagine why you would anyways. If you can only either afford 1 great monitor, or two mediocre ones, get the 1 great monitor. Then, save up and get another later. Don't worry about the CPU (unless you are under 1Ghz). I would say the same about keyboards and mice. I have an ergonomic keyboard that's still ps/2 connected. I've used it for roughly 5 years, and they don't make it anymore. Some keys have cigarette burns. But, it was the best $50 I ever spent. Same with my 5-button optical mouse (usb). I've had the same high back leather chair for about 6 years. I've had these particular dual monitors for about 4 years. All these things together will plug into whatever actual cpu/ram/hd you purchase. I've been through 3 different desktops in that time, but always with the same addons. And so, since you will likely be with them longer than a CPU, take more time on them than anything. You'll thank yourself 5 years from now when a new cpu would probably be sluggish and out of date, but not the accessories.
And yet, the Internet Archive's Wayback machine has been successfully used in several copyright court cases.
I'm not agreeing or disagreeing that either of these are the best sources. But, if Internet Archive is a valid legal source, then by all means Wikipedia is. (Because it keeps records of page updates as well, so you could trace the entry all the way back to the original post of the entry, as well as identify specific sources of each tidbit of information).
Google... nah, not really. Google is good for finding information, not validating it, imho.
Hey, he asked for it... "I am going to troll the fuck out of slashdot."
So, please, by all means, troll the fuck out of him, heh. Either that, or extremely humorous:
"XP... built from the ground up in the early 1990... without any legacy baggage... available essentially for free... there is no reason to use anything else"
Come on Bill, post without the AC name. You almost sounded like an SCO exec... until you praised XP.
"If a product isn't *near-perfect*, it never leaves beta. Contrast that with MS."
Now now, don't be too critical. We all know that IE 6.0 is definately not perfect. So, like Google leaving a product in beta, they left IE in 6.0. See, 6.0 = MS Beta. 5.0 and under was Alpha. But, they simply discontinued development on an obviously obsolete product until forced to do so. After all, MS has bigger projects than the Internet. The Internet is old news to Microsoft. What's hot is TV. MSNBC is the future! But, they left MSNBC in 5.0, and moved on to consoles, because XBox is the future! Why buy a game for a computer and play online for free forever, when you can buy the same game for your console and play for $20.00 a month on a TV that runs at at lower resolutions than 10 year old monitor?
Come on guys, haven't you had a POS car that you could afford to fix, so you just kinda... duct-taped it for a few more months, or years, or until your grandkids ask you what "Leaded" means?
Believe me, Microsoft has their finger on the button of the future, and the future is Leaded, baby!
http://tivac.com/images/ymail/hyperlinkoptions.png
I'm sure there are still servers out there... and I'm all for compatability... but really, Gopher, Wais? And, even if you do use them, and would actually e-mail a link to one, why would you be using Yahoo Mail? Wouldn't you be the type more comfortable telnetting into a sendmail server?
I hate to break this guy's bubble, but wouldn't he get the same, if not more, use out of the cat food, than the cat?
I'm probably wrong, but it's obvious enough to at least experiment with. Then again, cat food is expensive... I'd rather by 150 octane gas. Maybe dog food?
If he has to use former-living material as a base, at least use squirrels. Those suckers are everywhere. That, and nobody looks at you (too) funny if you claim to have eaten squirrel. Very in the western cultures claim to eat cats.
(Give me some credit, I avoided any hamster/wheel jokes.)