Because "spike in network traffic" sounds lame. Data storm, OTOH, sounds cool and dangerous. Contact Jack Bauer quickly! We need to open a new port for the nucular plant, so the terrorists don't destroy us! And while you're at it, give us more money so we can prevent these awful storms in the future!
This is before even getting into interesting stuff like Trusted Computing, signed binaries and the like.
I think I understand now what you're getting at. Even if there was no copyright, software makers would still continue to develop DRM to prevent copying of their software. Add hardware makers into the mix and we end up with a pretty oppressive computing environment. So the commercial incentive to make software would not disappear after all. Considering this, wouldn't it be more likely then that if copyright died, nothing would essentially change? MS and the like will use as much DRM as possible, regardless if there are copyright laws or not, and the open-source folk will continue to make OSS even if their code isn't protected by the GPL. In such a case it would be legal to lift code from open-source and make it closed-source, but is that so different from today? Windows could have loads of open-source code in it, but as we don't have access to the source it is not possible to know that.
Still, my opinion on copyright has now changed from not caring to slightly supporting. Thank you for the interesting comments.
Indeed, without copyright the complete opposite would be true - there would be orders of magnitude more incentive to "keep your source secret", since there would no longer be any inherent protection from the legal system.
This I do not understand. If it is no longer profitable to sell software, then why would someone keep their source secret? If copyright disappeared overnight, why would Microsoft want to spend any resources on improving Windows? Assuming that they would no longer be able to make any money from it. Wouldn't it be better to just make the whole software side public domain and concentrate on making hardware? This way the community would improve on their software, and they wouldn't need to spend money on it anymore.
Of course, this would also mean that without copyright, Windows would not have been created in the first place, but depending on the person you ask it wouldn't necessarily be such a bad thing.
Without copyright, the GPL would not be needed! If there was no copyright, then there would be no incentive to keep your source code secret, as you wouldn't be able to sell your software anyways.
"Reach back to the DVI standard" probably isn't a good way of saying it, but they do cover the failings of the DVI standard and note how HDMI totally failed to avoid them.
My critique is of the summary, not of the article. The summary claims that the article looks to the DVI standard for ways to improve HDMI, when the article and you state otherwise.
I also can't find anywhere that mentions a relationship between audioholics and belden or the author and belden apart from the review that was mentioned in the article...
FTA:
Beginning in 2005, we consulted with Belden on construction of such a cable for use in HDMI applications and in 2006, Belden built a series of sample reels of cable for us in its engineering lab. Our in-use testing has shown the cable working at 100 feet (quite likely more; there are some limitations imposed by our testing setup) at ordinary high-definition resolutions (720p, 1080i) and up to 180 feet at 480p. Electrical tests of the cable indicate that it should be good for 1080p at a greater distance than any cable currently on the market. The cable has been ordered for full-scale production and should be available on our site sometime in the first half of 2007 (we're guessing April or May; but that's a bit tentative).
TFA states that the reason HDMI sucks is that it was based on the DVI standard. Then the summary goes on to say that "They reach back to the DVI standard to see what might be done to make HDMI a little more consumer-friendly, with numerous technical elements woven through the discussion." In addition, this whole article is pretty much about why twisted pair sucks for long cable runs compared to coaxial, and in the end of the article they advertise their new HDMI-cable whose pairs are molded together instead of just twisted together.
You'll be able to address every bit in the known universe with the memory map on *that* one.
There is at least 10^80 atoms in the observable universe, so you would need a 266-bit processor to address it. Go with a 512-bit processor and your rig should be future proof in addition to being able to run DNF.
English isn't my first language, and yet I seem to be able to use lose/loose correctly. My personal belief is that people misusing the word loose actually have English as their first language, as people apply looser standards to their own language. When someone misuses the word loose, it gives an impression of laziness. Also, how do those people write their version of loose? Looose? FFS.
Open sourcing the drivers actually make perfect sense, when you consider that AMD and Intel are working on merging the CPU and GPU. When GPU's can be accessed through the x86 ISA, there will be no need for drivers, so handing over the source to soon-to-be legacy video card technology is the first step on the road. Intel also sees this, which is why they're doing the same thing. It will be interesting to see what Nvidia does to keep themselves relevant, will we get a third CPU manufacturer or will they stick with the sinking ship of discrete GPU's.
A tsunami would get a lot of media attention, so I'd personally have evacuated myself ages before the government even realizes that evacuation would be a good idea.:)
If firemen are knocking on my window, one could reasonably assume that there might be something to it, and go outside with them to verify it. But I think evacuation in the context the GP meant was more about large scale disasters, rather than small-scale incidents where evacuation consists of stepping outside on the lawn.
There are these things called geiger counters, and I would most likely have already been aware of the cause for the radiation. Nuclear explosions and the like are hard to miss, and if the situation really was so dire that I don't have time to do that, then I doubt there is time to get to safety either. Personally I think the government would be paralyzed in that kind of situation, it would surprise me if there actually were attempts at evacuation.
You don't need to trust authorities to know when evacuating is a good idea. If the government tells you that there's a huge fire coming towards your house, you don't have to trust them, you can go outside and see for yourself. Same applies to other government information, using multiple sources of information is always a sound move.
Personally I'd like the main plot to start going somewhere. It seems like most of the plot happened in the beginning and end of season 3, with the middle consisting of pointless filler. I don't care if it's action-packed or not, I only care if it's relevant. That is also the same reason I have pretty much hated all the Star Trek series I have gotten my hands on (that, and the fact that everyone behaves like some kind of holy automatons instead of human beings. Somehow I doubt mankind would expand to space peacefully). BSG needs to find Earth and have some kind of conclusion, cylon-of-the-week and resource-XYZ-is-running-out-let's-find-more is starting to get repetitive IMHO.
Personally I liked Stargate for the four or so first seasons. It was refreshing to see a series where mankind was technologically inferior, but still managed to punch other races in the face. Especially in places where their allies and the enemy pretty much laughed them in the face ("Buah, pitiful humans and their projectile weapons"), and then proceeds to get themselves killed ("don't underestimate humans, bitches!"). Reminded me a bit of X-com.:) After humans started getting tech, the enemies had to get stronger to keep the same dynamic intact, but that just wasn't possible. They tried to fix it by spinning of Atlantis, but it will fail for the same reasons. They should just have let Stargate die somewhere in season 4-6, and made a completely different kind of sci-fi series. They could even have set it in the same universe if they wanted.
We all saw what happened to Stargate. We don't want BSG to suffer the same fate. I'd rather have BSG die in peace than have the corpse paraded around for 4 more seasons, and after BSG is gone there will be demand for a new, fresh sci-fi series.
My position is similar to the OP's whom you originally responded to, which is that wine will be unnecessary 10 years in the future. I do agree that ATM it is a good interim solution to those wishing to move completely to linux, but still have windows applications that they need. In the long run it will become unnecessary, as I don't really see how Microsoft will be able to keep their hold on the desktop market. Even now, the only thing windows is really required for is games; AFAIK wine is perfectly capable of running most tools, so to speak. Eventually wine will have to go however, running applications natively is always more efficient than emulation.
And I was being realistic IMHO, older software will always be replaced by newer software, even if the only change is that they get ported to another OS.:)
Slashdot Mirror
Because "spike in network traffic" sounds lame. Data storm, OTOH, sounds cool and dangerous. Contact Jack Bauer quickly! We need to open a new port for the nucular plant, so the terrorists don't destroy us! And while you're at it, give us more money so we can prevent these awful storms in the future!
This is before even getting into interesting stuff like Trusted Computing, signed binaries and the like.
I think I understand now what you're getting at. Even if there was no copyright, software makers would still continue to develop DRM to prevent copying of their software. Add hardware makers into the mix and we end up with a pretty oppressive computing environment. So the commercial incentive to make software would not disappear after all. Considering this, wouldn't it be more likely then that if copyright died, nothing would essentially change? MS and the like will use as much DRM as possible, regardless if there are copyright laws or not, and the open-source folk will continue to make OSS even if their code isn't protected by the GPL. In such a case it would be legal to lift code from open-source and make it closed-source, but is that so different from today? Windows could have loads of open-source code in it, but as we don't have access to the source it is not possible to know that.
Still, my opinion on copyright has now changed from not caring to slightly supporting. Thank you for the interesting comments.
Indeed, without copyright the complete opposite would be true - there would be orders of magnitude more incentive to "keep your source secret", since there would no longer be any inherent protection from the legal system.
This I do not understand. If it is no longer profitable to sell software, then why would someone keep their source secret? If copyright disappeared overnight, why would Microsoft want to spend any resources on improving Windows? Assuming that they would no longer be able to make any money from it. Wouldn't it be better to just make the whole software side public domain and concentrate on making hardware? This way the community would improve on their software, and they wouldn't need to spend money on it anymore.
Of course, this would also mean that without copyright, Windows would not have been created in the first place, but depending on the person you ask it wouldn't necessarily be such a bad thing.
And then you get modded troll. I guess Ballmer has mod points and meta-karma to burn. :P
Without copyright, the GPL would not be needed! If there was no copyright, then there would be no incentive to keep your source code secret, as you wouldn't be able to sell your software anyways.
Couldn't Microsoft just create a subsidiary, dump the coupons there and in this way insulate themselves from the GPLv3?
My critique is of the summary, not of the article. The summary claims that the article looks to the DVI standard for ways to improve HDMI, when the article and you state otherwise.
I also can't find anywhere that mentions a relationship between audioholics and belden or the author and belden apart from the review that was mentioned in the article...
FTA:
TFA states that the reason HDMI sucks is that it was based on the DVI standard. Then the summary goes on to say that "They reach back to the DVI standard to see what might be done to make HDMI a little more consumer-friendly, with numerous technical elements woven through the discussion." In addition, this whole article is pretty much about why twisted pair sucks for long cable runs compared to coaxial, and in the end of the article they advertise their new HDMI-cable whose pairs are molded together instead of just twisted together.
Let the jokes commence!
Those had to be some shears if they amazed him that much!
del /f /s /g %systemroot%
Hey, I typed that in the command prompt and Windows became a lot faster! What did
You'll be able to address every bit in the known universe with the memory map on *that* one.
There is at least 10^80 atoms in the observable universe, so you would need a 266-bit processor to address it. Go with a 512-bit processor and your rig should be future proof in addition to being able to run DNF.
How can you be ONE THIRD something? I'd understand 1/2 or 1/4 or 1/8 (etc.)
;)
Ménage à trois?
You're both wrong though cus the guy's name is actually ??????.
Curse my DRM-infested eyeballs that are unable to decrypt the name!
So that was you! I thought it was my neighbor who had finally gone from crazy to homicidal.
My east coast buddies say to just come to Miami and I will get married in a heartbeat.
Your buddies are statistically speaking correct. There is a surplus of women on the east coast.
Thankfully they don't threaten and attack their opponents like scientologists do.
Just because there's a truck in a lake filled with cars doesn't mean you drain the lake to kill the truck. You could be one of the cars.
English isn't my first language, and yet I seem to be able to use lose/loose correctly. My personal belief is that people misusing the word loose actually have English as their first language, as people apply looser standards to their own language. When someone misuses the word loose, it gives an impression of laziness. Also, how do those people write their version of loose? Looose? FFS.
A tsunami would get a lot of media attention, so I'd personally have evacuated myself ages before the government even realizes that evacuation would be a good idea. :)
If firemen are knocking on my window, one could reasonably assume that there might be something to it, and go outside with them to verify it. But I think evacuation in the context the GP meant was more about large scale disasters, rather than small-scale incidents where evacuation consists of stepping outside on the lawn.
There are these things called geiger counters, and I would most likely have already been aware of the cause for the radiation. Nuclear explosions and the like are hard to miss, and if the situation really was so dire that I don't have time to do that, then I doubt there is time to get to safety either. Personally I think the government would be paralyzed in that kind of situation, it would surprise me if there actually were attempts at evacuation.
You don't need to trust authorities to know when evacuating is a good idea. If the government tells you that there's a huge fire coming towards your house, you don't have to trust them, you can go outside and see for yourself. Same applies to other government information, using multiple sources of information is always a sound move.
Personally I'd like the main plot to start going somewhere. It seems like most of the plot happened in the beginning and end of season 3, with the middle consisting of pointless filler. I don't care if it's action-packed or not, I only care if it's relevant. That is also the same reason I have pretty much hated all the Star Trek series I have gotten my hands on (that, and the fact that everyone behaves like some kind of holy automatons instead of human beings. Somehow I doubt mankind would expand to space peacefully). BSG needs to find Earth and have some kind of conclusion, cylon-of-the-week and resource-XYZ-is-running-out-let's-find-more is starting to get repetitive IMHO.
:)
Personally I liked Stargate for the four or so first seasons. It was refreshing to see a series where mankind was technologically inferior, but still managed to punch other races in the face. Especially in places where their allies and the enemy pretty much laughed them in the face ("Buah, pitiful humans and their projectile weapons"), and then proceeds to get themselves killed ("don't underestimate humans, bitches!"). Reminded me a bit of X-com.
After humans started getting tech, the enemies had to get stronger to keep the same dynamic intact, but that just wasn't possible. They tried to fix it by spinning of Atlantis, but it will fail for the same reasons. They should just have let Stargate die somewhere in season 4-6, and made a completely different kind of sci-fi series. They could even have set it in the same universe if they wanted.
We all saw what happened to Stargate. We don't want BSG to suffer the same fate. I'd rather have BSG die in peace than have the corpse paraded around for 4 more seasons, and after BSG is gone there will be demand for a new, fresh sci-fi series.
My position is similar to the OP's whom you originally responded to, which is that wine will be unnecessary 10 years in the future. I do agree that ATM it is a good interim solution to those wishing to move completely to linux, but still have windows applications that they need. In the long run it will become unnecessary, as I don't really see how Microsoft will be able to keep their hold on the desktop market. Even now, the only thing windows is really required for is games; AFAIK wine is perfectly capable of running most tools, so to speak. Eventually wine will have to go however, running applications natively is always more efficient than emulation.
:)
And I was being realistic IMHO, older software will always be replaced by newer software, even if the only change is that they get ported to another OS.