Actually, I'm thinking more of running X86 Linux binaries, including browser plugins. There are actually quite a few plugins available for X86 Linux, including Flash. With dynamic recompilation and other tricks, the speed hit of CPU emulation can actually be quite negligible, and it would be much easier than getting each developer to port their plugin to each CPU/OS combination.
Why not focus on building the ability to transparently run X86 binaries or shared libraries on X86 platforms in the kernel? Sort of like how MacOS can transparently run most 68K stuff on the PPC.
Sure, bochs, Plex86, etc. are solutions, but they aren't transparent, as you're basically running a X86 machine in a sandboxed environment.
It's not the more ideal solution from a purist's standpoint, but this would greatly increase the value of Linux (or BSD, etc.) on X85 platforms as a whole.
In its policies, EBay places the responsibility on the seller to comply with any applicable international rules. Eg, it's up to a seller of say, Nazi items, to prohibit and cancel any bids from places like France. But EBay does not block access to the site at large as Yahoo seems to need to do (unless they have a separate section for these prohibited items).
Do the French have a problem with this as well? Or have they just not gotten around to issuing an order against EBay as well?!
That $800 player writes discs in DVD-RAM format, a format which is incompatible with current DVD video players. This makes them really only useful for data backup.
The industry has yet to agree on a rewriteable DVD standard (there are four contenders), so any current "rewritable" DVD burner's discs will play in few, if any, DVD drives.
DVD-R is currently the only media format that is compatible with most DVD players and DVD-ROM drives across the board.
Since there will be two different code bases (open-source, and non-open source) for AFS, is there any guarantee that say, an OpenAFS client will work with IBM's commercially supported server (or vice versa). Or might we see the possiblity of forking into two similar, but different enough to be mutually incompatible standards?
This particular question wasn't specifically addressed in IBM's FAQ, although it answered some related questions.
I'm not sure if this is the way the guy actually did it, but, with an image-editing program program like Photoshop or the GIMP, you can map any image to an arbitrary palette -- in this case, the "six basic colors" of Legos.
Then, all you need is discipline and enough bricks to map every pixel to a brick of the appropriate color. With dithering, and using a sufficient number of bricks, you can replicate pretty much any image.
Easier to submit a patent ==> More frivolous patents submitted ==> More likely to be approved, especially if the Patent Office can't afford to research/scrutinize each submission as extensively.
A few years back, I worked at Microsoft as an intern, working on what is now Office 2000.
Contrary to people what might think of everyone at Microsoft having unrestricted access to source code, things are compartmentalized in the form of access restrictions on just who can access code.
In general, only people actually involved with a product can see source for it. Eg, the Office developers can't see Windows source code and vice versa. These restrictions might have been put in place to alleviate some of the Justice Department's concerns that having access to OS source was giving the apps group an unfair advantage, but nevertheless, there are barriers even internally -- you can't just go and access source code to everything that MS has from any one workstation behind the firewall.
In general (unless they are a reputatble company wiht a good net reputation, which are few and far between), do not under any circumstances follow a spammer's instructions for list "removal" (eg, replying to an address, or using a web page) -- send it to abuse@(the ISP involved). Note that most spam headers are forged, so you'll need to look at the "received" lines, and find the first non-forged one, which can be tricky.
Following a spammer's "instructions" will only confirm to them that you have a valid working email address that you check.
If the censorware blindly uses pattern-matching in the URLs (there was a article linked from Slashdot a while back giving some real-life examples of the absurdity of this), Slashdot itself may very well be censored (perhaps of "slash" being objectionable?!)
Remeber this: It's the judge's purpose, and only purpose here, to decide whether or not DeCSS runs contrary to existing law (the DMCA). In light of this, he did his job perfectly, with his decision.
It is NOT his purpose to decide whether that existing law is bad or not, and his own views regarding the law itself should not be relevant to the task at hand. So, protest the law, not the judge.
It might seem like all Yahoo needs to do is to block all *.fr hosts. Unfortunately, it's not that simple.
Many international and presumably French hosts have DNS names under the generic TLDs (.com,.net,.org, etc) and not their own country domains. Also, with multinational ISPs like AOL, they could probably just dial into a US dial-in number -- of course, the LD charges would be significant, but they'd then be surfing from a US IP.
And of course, a surfer can always just use an anonymous proxy located in the US.
Without resorting to other,offline measures measures, like credit card address verification for all users, it's pretty much impossible to block users by specific country.
Am I correct in assuming that most Internet traffic between continents pass thorugh the US?
Eg, I know that Europe and Asia have their own networks connecting countries in their own continents, but what about traffic between Europe and Asia? Would it go through Europe -> US -> Asia, or does every continent have direct connections with every other continent (Europe -> Asia) ?
If true, if the US Internet were to somehow go down, it would affect traffic not coming from or destined for it.
Napster is enjoined from copying or assisting or enabling or contributing to the copy or duplication of all copyrighted songs and musical compostions of which the plaintiffs hold rights
This order restrains Napster from enabling the copying of copyrighted works that the plantiffs (ie, the major record labels) have rights to. Granted, it effectively removes a large chunk of the content availble through Napster, but it is different than a shutdown.
How might this be implemented without a shutdown? I am playing a devil's advocate here, as I definitely hoped that Napster could continue in its present form. But, the labels could provide to Napster a list of all song titles that fall under their copyright, and the Napster server could employ pattern matching to prohibit songs with those names from being traded.
Sure, the list would be huge. And one could just rename a file, or intentionally misspell it -- so it would be quite easy to bypass.
But it would hinder searching for them. And, if a user delibrately rename/misspell a filename, the user him/herself, and not Napster, are conciously committing an act to skirt it, so the onus rests on them, and might consitutute that Napster is at least reasonably trying to proactively block unauthorized material from their servers.
The root servers (I don't know about every server, but at least A, for sure) are not only responsible for the root "." domain, but also responsible for the generic international TLDs, ie,.COM,.NET, etc. At least, that's what dig tells me.
Slashdot Mirror
But other than that, the GUI, and everything else sitting on top of it is purely OS X, and not open source, right?
Is the kernel/non-kernel basically the line of division between Darwin and OS X?
Actually, I'm thinking more of running X86 Linux binaries, including browser plugins. There are actually quite a few plugins available for X86 Linux, including Flash. With dynamic recompilation and other tricks, the speed hit of CPU emulation can actually be quite negligible, and it would be much easier than getting each developer to port their plugin to each CPU/OS combination.
Sure, bochs, Plex86, etc. are solutions, but they aren't transparent, as you're basically running a X86 machine in a sandboxed environment.
It's not the more ideal solution from a purist's standpoint, but this would greatly increase the value of Linux (or BSD, etc.) on X85 platforms as a whole.
Do the French have a problem with this as well? Or have they just not gotten around to issuing an order against EBay as well?!
The industry has yet to agree on a rewriteable DVD standard (there are four contenders), so any current "rewritable" DVD burner's discs will play in few, if any, DVD drives.
DVD-R is currently the only media format that is compatible with most DVD players and DVD-ROM drives across the board.
This particular question wasn't specifically addressed in IBM's FAQ, although it answered some related questions.
Then, all you need is discipline and enough bricks to map every pixel to a brick of the appropriate color. With dithering, and using a sufficient number of bricks, you can replicate pretty much any image.
Easier to submit a patent ==> More frivolous patents submitted ==> More likely to be approved, especially if the Patent Office can't afford to research/scrutinize each submission as extensively.
Contrary to people what might think of everyone at Microsoft having unrestricted access to source code, things are compartmentalized in the form of access restrictions on just who can access code.
In general, only people actually involved with a product can see source for it. Eg, the Office developers can't see Windows source code and vice versa. These restrictions might have been put in place to alleviate some of the Justice Department's concerns that having access to OS source was giving the apps group an unfair advantage, but nevertheless, there are barriers even internally -- you can't just go and access source code to everything that MS has from any one workstation behind the firewall.
All I'm saying is that posting Windows and Office sources would make the whole DeCSS brouhaha look like a trivial affair in comparison.
Almost a hoax for sure, but guess it shows how crazy things are in general.
In general (unless they are a reputatble company wiht a good net reputation, which are few and far between), do not under any circumstances follow a spammer's instructions for list "removal" (eg, replying to an address, or using a web page) -- send it to abuse@(the ISP involved). Note that most spam headers are forged, so you'll need to look at the "received" lines, and find the first non-forged one, which can be tricky. Following a spammer's "instructions" will only confirm to them that you have a valid working email address that you check.
It sounds a lot like what my old lab at Stanford was doing, in their 3-D fax project, except using ice rather than a more permanent material.
If the censorware blindly uses pattern-matching in the URLs (there was a article linked from Slashdot a while back giving some real-life examples of the absurdity of this), Slashdot itself may very well be censored (perhaps of "slash" being objectionable?!)
It is NOT his purpose to decide whether that existing law is bad or not, and his own views regarding the law itself should not be relevant to the task at hand. So, protest the law, not the judge.
It might seem like all Yahoo needs to do is to block all *.fr hosts. Unfortunately, it's not that simple. Many international and presumably French hosts have DNS names under the generic TLDs (.com, .net, .org, etc) and not their own country domains. Also, with multinational ISPs like AOL, they could probably just dial into a US dial-in number -- of course, the LD charges would be significant, but they'd then be surfing from a US IP.
And of course, a surfer can always just use an anonymous proxy located in the US.
Without resorting to other,offline measures measures, like credit card address verification for all users, it's pretty much impossible to block users by specific country.
Eg, I know that Europe and Asia have their own networks connecting countries in their own continents, but what about traffic between Europe and Asia? Would it go through Europe -> US -> Asia, or does every continent have direct connections with every other continent (Europe -> Asia) ?
If true, if the US Internet were to somehow go down, it would affect traffic not coming from or destined for it.
It's not on the US District Court's home page yet, although I expect it will be sometime (but when?): http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/
This order restrains Napster from enabling the copying of copyrighted works that the plantiffs (ie, the major record labels) have rights to. Granted, it effectively removes a large chunk of the content availble through Napster, but it is different than a shutdown.
How might this be implemented without a shutdown? I am playing a devil's advocate here, as I definitely hoped that Napster could continue in its present form. But, the labels could provide to Napster a list of all song titles that fall under their copyright, and the Napster server could employ pattern matching to prohibit songs with those names from being traded.
Sure, the list would be huge. And one could just rename a file, or intentionally misspell it -- so it would be quite easy to bypass.
But it would hinder searching for them. And, if a user delibrately rename/misspell a filename, the user him/herself, and not Napster, are conciously committing an act to skirt it, so the onus rests on them, and might consitutute that Napster is at least reasonably trying to proactively block unauthorized material from their servers.
The most ironic one in the whole archive: http: //www.cyberden.com/cgi-bin/showsinglesleeve.pl?dir =m&file=microsoft6.gif Rather like an anti-prophecy...
The root servers (I don't know about every server, but at least A, for sure) are not only responsible for the root "." domain, but also responsible for the generic international TLDs, ie, .COM, .NET, etc. At least, that's what dig tells me.