Nope, it has been said over million times and will be said once again: Patents do not get invalidated if they are not defended. Trademarks do, patents don't.
Data recovery labs can recover just about all of the information you destroy like that, writing just once isn't enough.. twice probably wouldn't do it either. Couple of dozen times of this and perhaps you've erased most of the stuff you had there.
Using different patterns for different passes is advisable so that there's no recognizable residue left. Writing just zeros two dozen times probably wouldn't obfuscate the residue enough to stop someone determined with the right equipment. So you need to replace/dev/zero with/dev/random to make the data on your hd unrecovable for say the fbi..
Don't doubt.. This is a store where the suits start at 600USD and go up to as high as you want to spend. Armani, versace, boss, dolce&gabbana, etc.. All the stuff is ridiculously priced(fortunately my dad was paying for the boss suit). They have to implement these kind of measures to protect their stuff.
That same clerk told me once that one time they cought a guy who had on him 3 suits on top of each other(+overcoat). Not surprisingly the detectors went off.. He also said that they sometimes get false alarms with the metal detectors(laptop is enough to set it off) but that the inconvienience is minor.
They were losing a lot of stuff to russians(the store is in finland) carrying things out in foil-lined bags and practically had to implement the metal detectors..
I remember talking to a store clerk at a quality menswear store about the anti-theft measures. They were using the tags and when I asked about someone having a bag lined with tin foil he just replied that the detectors also have a metal detector. Moderate amount of tin foil is going to give a pretty nice peak at a metal detector (much more than your cellphone or car keys) so they'll just (politely) check your stuff if the detectors go off at the door..
It takes a sampling frequency of 2x the highest analog frequency to be able to store enough information about that wave for a "perfect" reproduction. As you might have noticed cd has a 44khz sampling frequency meaning that it can store waveforms containing components of up to 22khz.
However.. DACs and ADCs are not ideal devices! There is several orders of magnitude worse sn-ratio with a DAC-ADC combo than a digital stream. It doesn't matter if you sample the output of a DAC with twice the rate of original data, you're still going to be presented with a horrible (compared to digital) sn-ratio which has already permanently degraded your music.
How about creating a new slashbox that has like the top20 news from last week or so. This way we could have some good articles showing longer and maybe prevent these silly reposts after a week. Those people defending the repost based on the fact that they don't read slashdot every day(what?!?) would be happy and those of us who do reload the front page 10 times a day didn't go insane..
How did the law go about having a recording played in the start of the call? I had a telemarketing call recently that started with a 25sec recording. I hanged up and 5 seconds later that recording was still playing. This was essentially keeping my phone unavailable for something more important. I recall reading about a law concerning this..
You would think that if some intelligent lifeform out there wants to send a signal that someone can easily decode they send it as simple and plain as possible! Simplest known method (to us) is modulating an electromagnetic carrier wave either with amplitude or frequency and it is a good guess that any other intelligent lifeform would be governed by the same laws of physics(electromagnetic radiation is pretty universal).
As to composite signals from several stars: yeah, right. Composite signals from two or more places converge into intelligent signals in at the most one place. It is a fair bet that lifeform capable of sending interstellar signals know some basic geometry. Setting that place to be earth would make no sense unless they knew that we are here and were only trying to reach us.
Even if we could only detect one part of this "composite" signal it would still definetly be irregular enough to qualify it as an alien communication. This is essentially what seti@home is looking for. It is not trying to decode anything, just detecting irregularities that might implicate intelligence..
Non-consecutive frequencies? What does that have to do with anything. Seti@home picks frequency bands and distributes those as chunks to work on. If someone should happen to send a signal modulated at a frequency higher than half of the bandwidth of those chunks it would not really matter! It would create a sideband and only this sideband would show at some other chunk. This would definetly be an irregularity that sets off all kinds of alarms and people would start to investigate more.
How the hypothetical aliens encode their message is totally irrelevant to seti@home. If there is a transmission method besides modulation of electromagnetic radiation it is also irrelevant to seti@home. If, however, this transmission can be received with a radio telescope it is more than likely that seti@home will catch it. Even if it catches only a part of some wierd pattern it is enough. We don't need to know more than a fraction of the message to know that something is being sent and for this seti@home is more than well equipped!
You don't obviously fly much, do you? I don't really care if there is an extra few hundred dollars in my ticket price if that extra few hundred dollars buys me better safety!
And I talk with some experience about flying. Past year I've flown United Airlines, American Airlines, US Airways, British Airways, Air France, Air China, Finnair, SAS, Air Pulkov(Russian). Within past 14months I've been to 4 different continents and 9 different countries and flown anything from a brand new 777 to small propeller-planes(MD-11, Boeing(777,767,757,747), Airbus(A320 etc.), Tupolev(russian), Saab(propeller)).
If regulating a) the building b) maintaining c) operating of these planes keeps them safer while increasing prices that's just fine with me. You don't want to be lightheaded about airline safety. My average ticket price for an intercontinental two-way flight is usually around 650usd, totally affordable. Sometimes I get a good deal and fly for 500usd or so, sometimes it costs up to a 1000usd.
I feel relatively safe flying something that operates to/from western europe or usa but airlines like air china(used boeing 767's) or Air Pulkov(used Tupolev's, russian) do make me a little uncomfortable. Why? Because I know that in these cases there is little or no control from anyone but the profit hungry airline-companies. Also, most of the accidents occur during take off or landing so ground control does play a big role(also regulated heavily in europe and usa).
What network bandwidth? 10mbps maybe, but consider this: CD-quality audio is 44.1khz * 16bits * 2 channels = 1.4 Mbits / second. 100Mbit network should do just fine for say 10-20 streams running back and forth..
Think again. It would work just fine. All of the processors or nodes take care of a single effect and the forward the results to the next processor. Sure it would introduce some lag but still you could utilise N processors or nodes for N effects. This is what you speculate with a "clever" algorithm but it really doesn't need to be clever at all..
I'd say that the best analogy is a unix pipe. To put several processors to work you would run all of the effects as separate processes piping the data from one process to another and have the operating system take care of nasty details..
Splitting one effect across several processors would need some pretty clever algorithms, but then again just buying a dsp-card or dedicating a fast enough a processor for the job might just be enough.
Almost correct.. They don't control any and all implementations of said technology, rather, they control the implementation specified in the patent. Of course this might be ridiculously broad (due to the stupidity of patent office) or just the only reasonable way of doing things, but still patents are only obtainable for specific implementations.
Yeah... 3dfx wasn't of much help. I got their alpha-quality documentation(pdf file explaining the registers of voodoo-chip *briefly*), searched on the internet for rest of the documentation based on the chip markings (found all of it!), used their beta-quality documentation, used some code from other people(some i2c-drivers and voodoo-i2c-adapter-code) used modified versions of bttv-code(tuner and sound-chip, sound mostly rewritten) and rewrote video-decoder code totally (was based on someone elses different project). Of course the code to tie all this together was to be written from scratch. I even ended up sending a patch to the kernel i2c-code to make things easier for i2c-client handling..
All of this would have been so much easier if 3dfx would just have had the the complete documentation online.. or had they actually assigned an engineer for this task. It took me less than a month(considerable amount of which was spent hunting a really stupid bug in my code) to go from nothing into almost fully working drivers, and that was my first ever device-driver/kernel-module.. Think what a professional software engineer could do..
I actually wrote those alpha quality drivers. The reason they are still alpha is that I did it during my vacation and once it ended so did the development(from my part anyway).
Actually those drivers did perform pretty well though. All inputs worked, you could tune to different stations, xawtv was fine, hardware scaling, automatic stereo detection, pal/ntsc independent!!!(this is something that the official win-drivers didn't support - only components that are pal/ntsc-dependent are the tuner and stereo-decoder).
Once I got my ntsc-version to display pal-source on screen and after some negotiations with 3dfx gave up on the possibility to use their realtime mpeg2-encoder (licensed from another company) I lost my interest alltogether-I was hoping to make something like tivo back then(before tivo existed, I think..). There are still some people, to my knowledge, playing with the source at sourceforge, project v3tv if anyone is interested.
Yes, you're wrong. This is exactly what is being done. It calls a custom ppp-dialup server that only gives access to one ip-address. Fortunately this address is also mapped in the regular internet and so you can connect to it either way. It is STANDARD PPP & TCP/IP. If tivo wanted to play nasty they could block all connections besides those taken from their custom&limited ppp-dialup.
IPv6 is mostly going to suck for cable/dsl-users. Sure, you can change your NIC's MAC, but I recall it being the cable modem/dsl that get's the address and cable/phone companies identify people(to grant access) based on the MAC. Even with dynamic ip(no need for that really, maybe same ip-part, but MAC different for one company) your're still constantly identified..
Okay.. So according to trolltechs website there are basically two versions: x11 and win32. win32 version is commercial only but x11 is available as both free and commercial depending on the use.
From the website:
Q. I want to use Qt to develop free software on Windows.
A. Qt/Windows is only available as Professional/Enterprise Edition, not as Free Edition. Using an X client library for Windows and a Windows X server, it is possible to use the X11 version of Qt on Windows.
Q. Is software based on the Qt Free Edition really free? Does it carry Trolltech license restrictions?
A. Yes, it is really free. No, there are no special Trolltech license restrictions on free software produced using the Free Edition. In fact, the opposite is true: The Qt Free Edition licensing demands that the software must be free. The receivers must have the rights to obtain the source code, change it, and redistribute it.
Slightly obscure and vague statements, but seems to imply that you could compile the free x11 version on windows and run it in an x-server..
But your question was: Can Qt and KDE Applications be Ported to Win32? Nowhere did you mention that you meant to use an X11 version instead of native win32..
Not quite accurate.. QT is double licensed. Linux/Unix version(the free one, for free programs) is available as both QPL and GPL but windows version is COMMERCIAL! So if you want to run any of your programs in windows you have to get the commercial license.
Basically QT is an interface to the windowing system and as such highly platform dependent so "porting" the free linux version would basically involve writing the whole thing from scratch.. not an option..
All of the questions presented in this are available on trolltechs website in faq. Sometimes I wonder if people submitting questions even try to do their own research.. I mean how hard is it to point your web browser from slashdot to say Google or www.trolltech.com .
And they also speculated on the reason: It requires few years of internal analysis before they can trust it. And besides, they probably have something much better (or something that has already survived decades worth of analysis) in use..
I think that a better comparison would be ppclinux and x86 linux running apache. Don't create an artifical deficiency for ppc when there clearly isn't a need for one.. Then again it would probably come down to the i/o capabilities. Maybe even better would be something like rc64 or seti@home, etc...
Slashdot Mirror
Nope, it has been said over million times and will be said once again: Patents do not get invalidated if they are not defended. Trademarks do, patents don't.
Using different patterns for different passes is advisable so that there's no recognizable residue left. Writing just zeros two dozen times probably wouldn't obfuscate the residue enough to stop someone determined with the right equipment. So you need to replace /dev/zero with /dev/random to make the data on your hd unrecovable for say the fbi..
That same clerk told me once that one time they cought a guy who had on him 3 suits on top of each other(+overcoat). Not surprisingly the detectors went off.. He also said that they sometimes get false alarms with the metal detectors(laptop is enough to set it off) but that the inconvienience is minor.
They were losing a lot of stuff to russians(the store is in finland) carrying things out in foil-lined bags and practically had to implement the metal detectors..
I remember talking to a store clerk at a quality menswear store about the anti-theft measures. They were using the tags and when I asked about someone having a bag lined with tin foil he just replied that the detectors also have a metal detector. Moderate amount of tin foil is going to give a pretty nice peak at a metal detector (much more than your cellphone or car keys) so they'll just (politely) check your stuff if the detectors go off at the door..
However.. DACs and ADCs are not ideal devices! There is several orders of magnitude worse sn-ratio with a DAC-ADC combo than a digital stream. It doesn't matter if you sample the output of a DAC with twice the rate of original data, you're still going to be presented with a horrible (compared to digital) sn-ratio which has already permanently degraded your music.
Nah.. actually I have a script that checks the front page every 10 minutes and sends any updates directly to my cellphone.. =)
How about creating a new slashbox that has like the top20 news from last week or so. This way we could have some good articles showing longer and maybe prevent these silly reposts after a week. Those people defending the repost based on the fact that they don't read slashdot every day(what?!?) would be happy and those of us who do reload the front page 10 times a day didn't go insane..
How did the law go about having a recording played in the start of the call? I had a telemarketing call recently that started with a 25sec recording. I hanged up and 5 seconds later that recording was still playing. This was essentially keeping my phone unavailable for something more important. I recall reading about a law concerning this..
As to composite signals from several stars: yeah, right. Composite signals from two or more places converge into intelligent signals in at the most one place. It is a fair bet that lifeform capable of sending interstellar signals know some basic geometry. Setting that place to be earth would make no sense unless they knew that we are here and were only trying to reach us.
Even if we could only detect one part of this "composite" signal it would still definetly be irregular enough to qualify it as an alien communication. This is essentially what seti@home is looking for. It is not trying to decode anything, just detecting irregularities that might implicate intelligence..
Non-consecutive frequencies? What does that have to do with anything. Seti@home picks frequency bands and distributes those as chunks to work on. If someone should happen to send a signal modulated at a frequency higher than half of the bandwidth of those chunks it would not really matter! It would create a sideband and only this sideband would show at some other chunk. This would definetly be an irregularity that sets off all kinds of alarms and people would start to investigate more.
How the hypothetical aliens encode their message is totally irrelevant to seti@home. If there is a transmission method besides modulation of electromagnetic radiation it is also irrelevant to seti@home. If, however, this transmission can be received with a radio telescope it is more than likely that seti@home will catch it. Even if it catches only a part of some wierd pattern it is enough. We don't need to know more than a fraction of the message to know that something is being sent and for this seti@home is more than well equipped!
Nah.. I think that the original poster had a point.
And I talk with some experience about flying. Past year I've flown United Airlines, American Airlines, US Airways, British Airways, Air France, Air China, Finnair, SAS, Air Pulkov(Russian). Within past 14months I've been to 4 different continents and 9 different countries and flown anything from a brand new 777 to small propeller-planes(MD-11, Boeing(777,767,757,747), Airbus(A320 etc.), Tupolev(russian), Saab(propeller)).
If regulating a) the building b) maintaining c) operating of these planes keeps them safer while increasing prices that's just fine with me. You don't want to be lightheaded about airline safety. My average ticket price for an intercontinental two-way flight is usually around 650usd, totally affordable. Sometimes I get a good deal and fly for 500usd or so, sometimes it costs up to a 1000usd.
I feel relatively safe flying something that operates to/from western europe or usa but airlines like air china(used boeing 767's) or Air Pulkov(used Tupolev's, russian) do make me a little uncomfortable. Why? Because I know that in these cases there is little or no control from anyone but the profit hungry airline-companies. Also, most of the accidents occur during take off or landing so ground control does play a big role(also regulated heavily in europe and usa).
What network bandwidth? 10mbps maybe, but consider this: CD-quality audio is 44.1khz * 16bits * 2 channels = 1.4 Mbits / second. 100Mbit network should do just fine for say 10-20 streams running back and forth..
I'd say that the best analogy is a unix pipe. To put several processors to work you would run all of the effects as separate processes piping the data from one process to another and have the operating system take care of nasty details..
Splitting one effect across several processors would need some pretty clever algorithms, but then again just buying a dsp-card or dedicating a fast enough a processor for the job might just be enough.
Almost correct.. They don't control any and all implementations of said technology, rather, they control the implementation specified in the patent. Of course this might be ridiculously broad (due to the stupidity of patent office) or just the only reasonable way of doing things, but still patents are only obtainable for specific implementations.
Go right ahead with your plans. Like someone already mentioned somedomain.ch is a swiss domain. And when can we expect to see these sites?
All of this would have been so much easier if 3dfx would just have had the the complete documentation online.. or had they actually assigned an engineer for this task. It took me less than a month(considerable amount of which was spent hunting a really stupid bug in my code) to go from nothing into almost fully working drivers, and that was my first ever device-driver/kernel-module.. Think what a professional software engineer could do..
Actually those drivers did perform pretty well though. All inputs worked, you could tune to different stations, xawtv was fine, hardware scaling, automatic stereo detection, pal/ntsc independent!!!(this is something that the official win-drivers didn't support - only components that are pal/ntsc-dependent are the tuner and stereo-decoder).
Once I got my ntsc-version to display pal-source on screen and after some negotiations with 3dfx gave up on the possibility to use their realtime mpeg2-encoder (licensed from another company) I lost my interest alltogether-I was hoping to make something like tivo back then(before tivo existed, I think..). There are still some people, to my knowledge, playing with the source at sourceforge, project v3tv if anyone is interested.
Yes, you're wrong. This is exactly what is being done. It calls a custom ppp-dialup server that only gives access to one ip-address. Fortunately this address is also mapped in the regular internet and so you can connect to it either way. It is STANDARD PPP & TCP/IP. If tivo wanted to play nasty they could block all connections besides those taken from their custom&limited ppp-dialup.
Not just lower tariff, but no tariff at all. Importing computers to Europe is tax-free, importing consoles isn't..
IPv6 is mostly going to suck for cable/dsl-users. Sure, you can change your NIC's MAC, but I recall it being the cable modem/dsl that get's the address and cable/phone companies identify people(to grant access) based on the MAC. Even with dynamic ip(no need for that really, maybe same ip-part, but MAC different for one company) your're still constantly identified..
Have you ever tried washing your tv? More than enough to disable the tags, trust me on this.. ;)
Okay.. So according to trolltechs website there are basically two versions: x11 and win32. win32 version is commercial only but x11 is available as both free and commercial depending on the use.
From the website:
Q. I want to use Qt to develop free software on Windows.
A. Qt/Windows is only available as Professional/Enterprise Edition, not as Free Edition. Using an X client library for Windows and a Windows X server, it is possible to use the X11 version of Qt on Windows.
Q. Is software based on the Qt Free Edition really free? Does it carry Trolltech license restrictions?
A. Yes, it is really free. No, there are no special Trolltech license restrictions on free software produced using the Free Edition. In fact, the opposite is true: The Qt Free Edition licensing demands that the software must be free. The receivers must have the rights to obtain the source code, change it, and redistribute it.
Slightly obscure and vague statements, but seems to imply that you could compile the free x11 version on windows and run it in an x-server..
But your question was: Can Qt and KDE Applications be Ported to Win32? Nowhere did you mention that you meant to use an X11 version instead of native win32..
Basically QT is an interface to the windowing system and as such highly platform dependent so "porting" the free linux version would basically involve writing the whole thing from scratch.. not an option..
All of the questions presented in this are available on trolltechs website in faq. Sometimes I wonder if people submitting questions even try to do their own research.. I mean how hard is it to point your web browser from slashdot to say Google or www.trolltech.com .
And they also speculated on the reason: It requires few years of internal analysis before they can trust it. And besides, they probably have something much better (or something that has already survived decades worth of analysis) in use..
I think that a better comparison would be ppclinux and x86 linux running apache. Don't create an artifical deficiency for ppc when there clearly isn't a need for one.. Then again it would probably come down to the i/o capabilities. Maybe even better would be something like rc64 or seti@home, etc...