Well, I'm sure you had a bad experience but business have been using computerized voicemail systems for years. I remember setting one up back in 1993-1994. It was the BigMouth card/software package if anyone here remembers it. Basically a voice modem and software to record audio (in some proprietary compressed format I believe) to the hard drive. It didn't use much space at all (maybe 50-100MB or so) and worked beautifully. Each employee got their own mailbox and calling in people could press codes to navigate through menus and so forth.
The downside is because they are targetting small business customers, any quality package is going to have small business pricing (like $300-400 and up). I've seen some costing thousands. I think it's only a matter of time before on of these companies see the market for a low-cost stripped down home version and we start seeing more of it.
Heck, Microsoft will probably put it in XP SE or something. They are already heading in that direction with the all-encompassing Windows Messanger.
I know what you are talking about. Compaq Presario computer came with the same kind of stripped down answering machine software. I never met anyone who actually used it.
But the idea isn't a bad one. I personally think it is a great idea. Answering machines are a pain in the ass to program, have the crappiest recording quality, store abismally short messages (unless you want to go back to the 80's and get tape) and are pretty darn insecure (two digit security codes? C'mon, that takes under an hour to wardial).
Here's why it's never caught on:
1) Most family types don't want to leave their computers on. We power users and techies are used to having everything running 24/7. At most we'll put our monitors to sleep. We either don't care about power savings or we have an overriding need to be able to access the box without some silly remote power-on device. But this is not how Mom/Dad/Grandma/Grandpa view a computer. They turn the darn thing on and off a hundred times in the day. So the idea of leaving it on just to answer the phones is a contradicting idea to them.
2) There's never been a home operating system that could stay up long enough for the function to work. Cheap 95/98/ME OS plus cheap voicemail software plus cheap winmodem means the only messages you get are written on a bright blue screen. But now there is XP, which is at least a passing attempt at a stable platform. Now if they just get some software to run as a service (IE, sitting there quietly in the system tray where it is unlikely to be closed) then perhaps home users will see the value in it.
I like it because the next step is to merge in VoIP services or videoconferencing or other power features. If we can get a large base of people using to thinking of their computers as telephony devices we can hopefully open a market for some real digital phone services.
Not to mention, it gets people adjusted to the idea of having a home server, which I think every home needs. If you leave it on all the time for answer machine functions it isn't a stretch to add other funtions like media/music server or security/webcam monitor or light/appliance controller.
In other words, this effort that went into this coordinated 27-city raid (which took probably tens of thousands of manhours to prepare and execture) could not have been spent elsewhere?
Because I thought we were still at war with terrorism. I thought we were still living with the constant threat of terrorism. Every one of these FBI agents chasing down CD images is one less agent knocking on doors, interviewing potential suspects.
I swear, if there are any attacks or terrorist incidents tomorrow, or the next week, or hell, any time the first question I'll be writing my congressman will be "Where was the FBI?"
I almost hope something does happen. What's it going to take for the FBI to learn their FIRST AND PRIMARY responsability is to safeguard the lives of American citizens...NOT the PROFITS of American corporations.
I actually hired a neighborhood kid to do that. A friend of mine was moving out of the area and I decided to make a local mirror of his collection so that I could continue to "borrow" CDs from him. It was around 400 CDs or so that I was interested in ripping but I quickly realized what a major hassle it was.
Then I got an idea and called up another friend and ask if his younger brother (age 13) wanted to earn a little money. I offered to pay $40 to rip them for me. I brought over a stripped down Win98 box with a fast CD-ROM and he got it done that weekend. All he had to do was stick the CD in, wait for CDDB to fill in the names, and click the convert button in MusicMatch or whatever the hell I was using back then. Rinse, repeat.
I mean, kids these days are usually familiar with the process anyway. A completely low-tech solutions but hey, if this is a one time deal why buy hardware that costs ten times as much?
Does anyone else seem to get a sense that in the not-so-distant future the only people who will be allowed to access, examine, copy, quote, share and distribute information will be teachers?
Can I show a movie to a bunch of strangers? No, that constitutes a "public performance" and I would get fined for it. But can teachers show a movie to their class? Apparently they can.
Can I put an a clip from a TV show on my webpage and point out why it's so particularly funny? No, that's illegal copyright infringement and lawyers would have me take it down. But can teachers put a clip from a TV show on their webserver and ask the class to write a ten page paper on the message? Apparently they can.
Can I disassemble an encryption format and post the result for others to examine and duplicate? No, that's a DMCA violation and the FBI would be after me. But can teachers disassemble an encryption format and post an in-depth analysis of how it works (or doesn't work)? Apparently they can.
I could go on, but it seems to me that in the coming years, I might want to think about moving towards "Education" as an excuse for information exchange.
Don't have a warez group. Have a "copy protection analysis and discussion" group. Don't have a TVRip group. Have a "Pop culture examination and analysis" group.
I mean, who's an authority on something? Who is a teacher except someone who can explain concepts to those who do not yet know them?
If Felten seems to enjoy some magical protection, in the eyes of the court, why can't any other teacher? Why can't I become a teacher and enjoy the same protection?
- JoeShmoe
Re:What the hell is wrong with the Judiciary
on
DMCA 2, Freedom 0
·
· Score: 1
To quote my own post:
"I'm not talking about one business fighting with another; can anyone think of a single case in the last twenty years where an individual or non-profit group was victorious in an action brought by a large corporation"
US vs. Microsoft was caused by monopoly behavior against Netscape and/or Sun. Consumers for years have been screaming bloody murder about MS tactics but the government never moved until other business suddenly fell victim to the same thing.
So I don't think this really answers my question.
Not to mention...the decision was reversed essentially on appeal and so it's not a happy anti-business ruling in any sense. Microsoft might even end up putting 2000 or XP in thousands of schools around the country as "punishment".
http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-8011238.htm l
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks like New York Appeals Court is saying one thing and California Appeals Court is saying the opposite?
Pure speech versus non-expressive speech...which is the accurate description of DeCSS?
It seems to me that since we have two conflicting rulings between states, there would be a pressing interest in escalating the issue to the federal level? Or is it possible for two different standards to be applied in two different regions?
Suddenly I'm a lot happier to be a Californian, even though it was the f'n studios that started the whole DeCSS fiasco to begin with...
- JoeShmoe
_
Re:What the hell is wrong with the Judiciary
on
DMCA 2, Freedom 0
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Oh yeah, that's right. Let's allow the DoJ to arrest Felten and throw him in jail like Skylerov. Let's allow the DoJ to confiscate all of Felten's computers and equipment for years while they stall through the trial process. Let's allow the DoJ to make Felten liable for any infringing action that results from his research. Oh THEN he has a right to bring the matter before a judge?
RIAA says "publish and we'll sue you or worse, we'll tell the FBI your research is a circumvention device" Why is it frivilous for Felten to come before a judge and say "hey, do they really have a case?"
There has got to be some legal basis for preventative measures. Look at trade secret laws. There doesn't even need to be damages...just the mere threat of damages is enough for a judge can issue a restraining order. So why doesn't this work in the other direction? Why can't a judge issue a ruling that says "No, the DMCA doesn't apply to what you are doing Felten, carry on." Why does Felten have to do things the hard way and martyr himself?
Maybe there would be a whole lot less civil disobidience if there was a way for someone to get a ruling before actually breaking the law. Who exactly are you supposed to believe? An unfair law or the judges who interpret it? I read the law and see permission to do something. Big Company reads the same law and sees the exact opposite. Does the FBI listen to my side of the case when Big Company asks them to arrest me? Do they say "oh yeah, good point, you are free to go?" No. Even when Adobe "recanted" Dmitri was still in prison. So then if it's not up to the executive branch, it must be up to the judicial branch. So that is why Felten and the EFF went to court...to ask the judicial branch what this law means. But rather than study it, hear testimony, call experts, and finally make a ruling...the judge ducks the issue.
Oh, and by the way, wtf kind of crack are you smoking to make the statement that judges "get to where they are through being throughly qualified for the position" Judicial appointments are as based on merit as the electoral college is. They are done completely down political and ideological lines...ie picking judges that are gonna vote the way you want them to vote on the issues that matter to your group. But whether is is Democrat or Republician it seems to me there is an appalling pro-business bias in the judges that have been chosen in the last couple decades. Can anyone even remember an anti-business ruling? I'm not talking about one business fighting with another; can anyone think of a single case in the last twenty years where an individual or non-profit group was victorious in an action brought by a large corporation? Are there any success stories?
For crying out loud...ten? twenty? years ago the Supreme Court of the United States rules that Hustler magazine had the right to embarass the hell out of a religious figure because, distasteful as the comments were, they were free speech. What do you think the odds are that the same case would have even made it to the Supreme Court if Hustler had instead embarassed a major corporation?
SDMI hadn't even picked a secure music format. There was *NO* chance of damage or IP theft and still they pissed their pants over Felten's analysis. Why? Because it showed what a ludicrous idea watermarking is. Reactions like this only helps prove that the real intent of the DMCA is not to protect IP or prevent piracy but to prevent the publication or dissemination of any information that embarasses or otherwise injures the reputation of a major corporation and its products.
- JoeShmoe
What the hell is wrong with the Judiciary
on
DMCA 2, Freedom 0
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Really. Do the issues raised not even give them PAUSE for a moment? This is a professor we are talking about...okay, on the face I can understand the prejudice that exists againt 2600 (even though I also understand the irony of that statement since a judge shouldn't have let his or her own belief affect their judgement) and see why that case was dismissed...but the Felton case?
WTF???
This is a goddam professor we are talking about. Speech and professor goes together like bribery and politician. If a professor stands up as says "hey, i'm not able to do my job" what the hell kind of idiot judge says "whatever".
I thought for sure this was a silver bullet against the DMCA and I can't believe that the EFF is already fighting an uphill battle on what seems blately a first ammendment issue to any first year law student.
Seriously W-T-F
Can judges be impeached? Can they have their positions revoked? I'm pretty sure the Supreme Court Justices are appointed for life but what about the lower levels? Is there any way we can start a campaign to get idiots like this off the bench? These people are clearly not representing the people, the Constitution, or anything except Executive Branch and Legislative Branch interests.
RULINGS LIKE THESE ARE DESTROYING THE F'N CHECKS AND BALANCES SYSTEM
The thing that is stupid about Weakest Link is that people are penalized for not knowing EVERY single question. I mean, how retarded is that? In every game show I've ever seen there has always been a way to defer one or two questions on subjects you don't know. Jeopardy you get to pick the category. Millionaire you get the lifelines.
Weakest Link is stupid because it is completely random luck. You either get asked what color is clover or who invented the little plastic thing that holds the ends of your shoelaces together. This forces people to become paranoid and bank at ridiculously low levels. Most people barely let the pot hit $5000 before yelling "BANK!"
Here's how it should work:
Answering the question right adds a link and increases the pot. Answer the question wrong and the pot disappears completely. Say "BANK" (or "PASS" or whatever) and the pot gets banked and resets to zero and play moves onto the next person.
That way, the bank has a real chance to grow. So it costs more money, boo hoo hoo. Millionaire gives away more in a single night than Weakest Link does in a week. It is just plain anti-climatic to see someone fight his way through this whole Darwinian process only to walk away with the paltry sum of $30,000 and change.
It would be nice, but you have to understand that it's not worth the extra $20
Whuh?
You want to target the high end consumer...and to that end you make an admittedly more expensive (but better!) unit...but then balk at a $20 feature? Did you ask your sample group if they'd rather have a plain old backlit LCD display but get the digital port? I know I would.
How long is this device supposed to last? True, maybe there aren't a lot of people right now that have digital inputs on their stereo, but what about in a couple years? Five years? Ten years? The explosive growth of DVD is causing a lot of people to reexamine their home theater systems and upgrade to digital sound.
One possibility is maybe find a convenient place on the mainboard for an expansion card? My cheap, cheap $50 SBLive didn't come with an optical output (only SPDIF), but i was able to get a $8 daughtercard from a Taiwanese website that gave me me a TOSLink output for my MD player. So maybe you could find a place to put a few pins and then offer customers a digital output option? That way the price increase is minimized and those who want the feature can pay extra for it.
Except this devices is hand-made in a garage in lots of a couple hundred each. This isn't meant to disparage the quality, but as such it might not be available when you want it where you live.
In fact the website says "The SliMP3 is not yet ready for sale. If you would like to receive an e-mail when our first units become available, please submit the form below." so I guess right now it isn't available at all.
Plus it's about $70 more expensive even though it contains less hardware (price of hand assembly).
However, both the SliMP3 and SonicBlue suffer from the same fatal flaw...lack of digital output. What is the point in streaming full quality 256Kbps digitally across my house only to lose that quality in the last few feet due to a cheap-as-you-can-mass-produce DAC? I don't care if you use Monster cable, analog just isn't digital and if I'm spending $200+ bucks then shouldn't I get the full solution?
I think both these devices should be updated to include a TOSlink/coaxial output (preferably both). Most people just run speaker wire across their house so these devices both seem to target power users/audiophiles.
I'd also like to point out there is a HUGE market for a similar device that can play video files, not just audio files. No one wants to put a computer in their home theater because it is too bulky and noisy. Wouldn't it be awesome to keep all your movies on a server in the computer room and then stream them to some small little elegant and quiet device just like these audio players?
So where is the mirror of this program your friend wrote? It sounds very interesting. Even if I'm only able to get Pong ported over to the PSX hardware that sounds pretty darn cool.
Typical Sony overreaction. There are plenty of different boot loaders (CDs that you boot, then swap out for a CD-R copy of a game) and plenty of mod chips (chips you solder onto your PSX board to force it to ignore PS-specific boot sector). If anyone is interested in playing pirated games they are already doing in. Buy a mod chip for $30 bucks and then rent all the PSX games you can from Blockbuster, copy them, and presto instant game collection. So if Sony things this little program is going to lead to any more game copying than already exists they are clueless beyond belief. More likely they are afraid people will be able to write quality games WITHOUT having to pay the Sony tax to become an official PSX licensee.
Meanwhile this tool could be very useful for this like porting MAME over to the PSX (would be nifty for the PS1 to make a portable MAME machine) and as you put it, writing your own games.
So, please tell me your friend passed the tool around a bit before Sony shut him down? What was the file name so we can know to keep an eye out should it just "happen" to appear on Kazaa/eDonkey/LimeWire/etc (maybe, oh, sometime this week)?
1) Back in 1995-1996 I was downloading plenty of movies at 9600 or 14.4 baud. They were all in the old ViVo format (.VIV which was purchased by Real a couple years later). I think the first one I ever downloaded was Boobwatch. Each movie was only about 60-100MB in size and could easily be downloaded overnight. The bitrate was HORRIBLE but back the thrill of downloading an ENTIRE MOVIE made up for it.
2) My only 486 could never in its wildest dreams play DivX, which is MPEG-4 and requires a crapload of processing power...but even a lowly 486 can handle MPEG-1 or low bitrate RealMedia. So I can believe it's possible to watch movies on even an old Commodore PC clone.
3) The warez scene outside the G8 looks completely different. There is virtually no sympathy for copyright interests, especially US ones. You are more than likely to find major warez sites being run from state-owned resources (I myself was once offered access to a site that resolved to something under iif.hu and, judging from the amount of information it contained, had obviously been running for months). The scene is usually very close knit and tight. If you only have one or two ISPs then you get to know the staff pretty intimately, and from there its very easy to develop a "communal software resource".
I think a good way to look at computer users in these underdeveloped countries is to compare them to HAM radio users. They have a piece of hardware that connects them to a larger community of users, and sooner or later they'll run into someone in their own area, and from there they can exchange contact with others they have met and boom, a local user group is born.
Be careful what you do with your final product. According to their FAQ they have patented this process.
However, since they don't list the patent number, I'm wondering if it's merely patent pending. What would it be under "Patent for automated mute button"? I'm surprised that this hasn't been brought up by someone already.
Of course, before you go and rail on MovieMask for frivolous patents, consider that they are planning to release this program for "any Linux based system" (from the same FAQ). I'm also surprise no one has mentioned that! Now, do the two things cancel each other out?
Regarding the idea itself...I would like to see a third option beside mute and fast-forward: zoom. This is what a lot of TV releases do to allow a scene with important content but hide objectionable content. If the woman talking is topless, zoom in to cut off everything below the neck. If I guy is going to be shot to a bloody stump, zoom to focus on the look of horror and not the blood gushing from the squibs. Many, many objectionable scenes can be fixed in this manner.
This type of CD-R/RW usage has been available (in Windows) for years via third-party software like Adaptec/Roxio's DirectCD or the NTI's FileCD and so on. CD players already support packet writing! Why is Microsoft, IBM et. al. taking about reengineering the CD from at such a low level? Doesn't it just require someone to write a Linux version of DirectCD/FileCD? Why can't we just format CD-R/RW discs with the UDF file system that DVD's already use instead of inventing a brand new one?
Also, I'm not sure I even like the idea of this becoming the "default" behavior for CD writers. I strongly dislike the overhead involved in formatting. I find that a packet writing CD-R/RW hold about 100MB less. I'd rather have the full capacity. I mean, if you are using this thing for business backup (which seems to be the primary argument for needing Linux support) then you are only going to be burning once a day, so why not just burn a full 650/700MB worth of data as a single data track?
That's like write-protecting the entire drive. It's stupid and foolish.
Technically, the default in Windows NT is to allow Administrators access to the registry, but deny Users. But even then, that's talking about the System registry (HKEY_CLASSES, HKEY_LOCALMACHINE etc). They can still access their own registry hive (HKEY_CURRENTUSER). Any time they change a setting like background color or window placement (provided those rights haven't been taken away by a system policy) is saved there.
You wouldn't write protect an entire drive to keep people from messing with the Windows directory. Just block off that directory.
Likewise, the registry has the same kind of access controls. Give developers read/write access to a specific key in HKEY_LOCALMACHINE\SOFTWARE. Technically, this is where they should be storing registry settings anyway.
They start over from scratch, eliminate major previous Civ concepts, invent this completely new (and untested) culture paradigm and you are faulting me for asking them to change the map layout?
Everyone knows the major time drag is game development is in the artwork. Converting a square grid into a hex grid is simple because they are both perfect tesselations. Just cut the artwork in different places.
And I don't get your gunpowder comment at all. Asking more more realism in a game profession to take Civ to new heights of realism isn't unreasonable at all.
If only Citrix wasn't so stupid they would realize that the best way to keep Microsoft out of the Terminal Server space would be to adopt more competitive pricing.
On the one hand you have Citrix at $5000 for 20 users. On the other hand you have Microsoft for $0 for unlimited users ($75 for any user not running Win2000).
That's utterly insane. Why do they make such an absurdly high barrier to entry? Microsoft begins Server and Small Business Server at the 5-client license level so why on earth is Citrix starting at 20? They are immediately discounting almost all of the small businesses out there.
Knowing now that I can't run 256 colors on Windows 2000 Terminal Services...I'm not about to recommend this mom and pop shop plunk down five grand for Citrix...i'm going to recommend they pay a few hundred and upgrade to Windows XP server.
One day, like Novell, Citrix will wake up and wonder where all their customers went. Only then will they realize that people aren't interested in paying a premium for a market leader when Microsoft has a "good enough" option available for free.
Feh! I was already upset I had to install Windows 2000 instead of Windows NT 4.0 Terminal Server...now I gotta install XP! Bleah!
Unfortunately, a small shop like this one cannot afford to fork out the money for the server hardware, Windows 2000 Server AND on top of that, Citrix licensing.
If I could have my wish I'd just X-server the whole thing but unfortunately this application is strictly closed-source Windows-only.
I can't believe Microsoft hardcoded this. I mean, they are basically using the same code for their remote administration tools yet it lacks this most basic option that pcAnywhere and VNC has had forever.
Basically, what is and is not covered in your support contract. For big orders, you get to negotiate your own EULA not just take what they hand you.
For example, an SLA might cover finacial losses due to system failure, whereas every normal EULA under the sun absolves hardware vendors of liability for secondary losses.
Draw yourself a 5 by 5 square grid. That represents the range of motion 2 spaces from the center square. But it's a square. Which means for some reason these mythical Civ units can somehow move 50% farther if they travel in one direction than they can in another. Now consider an 11 by 11 grid representing the range of motion of some units and you see how this is a bit ridiculous.
Civ designers understood this and that's why cities have such a funky shape (that same 5 by 5 grid with the four corners cut off). This crude "sphere" represents what an area of influence around a central point should look like.
Part of a rich gaming experience is realism and accuracy. By allowing units to move farther on a diagonal, it's cheating. A unit can traverse a whole continent in a couple turns if it moves along the diagonal.
Not to mention, what kind of rich gaming experience is it if you put a unit out there to guard something, expecting that attackers would have to go through it...but finding that by travelling along diagonals they can simply go around it?
If a unit is supposed to have a "sphere of influence" that they are guarding, you need a hexagonal grid. On a hex grid, a unit is surrounded by six spaces and creates an effective blockade. On a square grid, a unit is surrounded by only four spaces (N S E W, diagonals aren't protected in Civ).
Given that the goal seems to be emulating spheres of city/unit/artifact influence, a hexagonal grid is the most accurate way of doing it.
Is there anyone else that gets as irritated with square grids as I do?
A hex grid more closely resembles a "circle" of influence. With a square grid you have to cut corners off a square. This results in a whole bunch of funky problems:
1) It's impossible to put your cities adjacent to each other without wasting space. The best you can do is waste two spaces per group of four cities. This ain't bad but odds are that some important resource is going to be stuck on one of those wasted squares. A hex grid would make it possible to pack cities close together in several different designs while still not wasting any space.
2) Units get jammed up on enemy units because they are diagonally adjacent. It's absurd because while the computer won't let you move sideways when there is a unit at the diagonal, you can move down and diagonally to end up in the same place. With a hex grid, movement from each space basically forks into two opposite directions. So it's very easy to go around units without getting caught in these kinds of bogus traps.
3) People argue that square grids are easier to navigate with a standard keypad. This is entirely untrue. Other strat games that have hex grids still use the keypad, they simply use either the top and bottom row or left and right column (depending on how the hex grid is oriented). The bonus is that you have three extra buttons now to control movement.
The continued use of the square grid is the one thing about Civ/CivII/AlphaC that I absolutely detest. I really wish someone at Firaxis could have thought to change that with this upcoming CivIII game...but perhaps the next one will finally be this way.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, I'm sure you had a bad experience but business have been using computerized voicemail systems for years. I remember setting one up back in 1993-1994. It was the BigMouth card/software package if anyone here remembers it. Basically a voice modem and software to record audio (in some proprietary compressed format I believe) to the hard drive. It didn't use much space at all (maybe 50-100MB or so) and worked beautifully. Each employee got their own mailbox and calling in people could press codes to navigate through menus and so forth.
The downside is because they are targetting small business customers, any quality package is going to have small business pricing (like $300-400 and up). I've seen some costing thousands. I think it's only a matter of time before on of these companies see the market for a low-cost stripped down home version and we start seeing more of it.
Heck, Microsoft will probably put it in XP SE or something. They are already heading in that direction with the all-encompassing Windows Messanger.
- JoeShmoe
.
I know what you are talking about. Compaq Presario computer came with the same kind of stripped down answering machine software. I never met anyone who actually used it.
But the idea isn't a bad one. I personally think it is a great idea. Answering machines are a pain in the ass to program, have the crappiest recording quality, store abismally short messages (unless you want to go back to the 80's and get tape) and are pretty darn insecure (two digit security codes? C'mon, that takes under an hour to wardial).
Here's why it's never caught on:
1) Most family types don't want to leave their computers on. We power users and techies are used to having everything running 24/7. At most we'll put our monitors to sleep. We either don't care about power savings or we have an overriding need to be able to access the box without some silly remote power-on device. But this is not how Mom/Dad/Grandma/Grandpa view a computer. They turn the darn thing on and off a hundred times in the day. So the idea of leaving it on just to answer the phones is a contradicting idea to them.
2) There's never been a home operating system that could stay up long enough for the function to work. Cheap 95/98/ME OS plus cheap voicemail software plus cheap winmodem means the only messages you get are written on a bright blue screen. But now there is XP, which is at least a passing attempt at a stable platform. Now if they just get some software to run as a service (IE, sitting there quietly in the system tray where it is unlikely to be closed) then perhaps home users will see the value in it.
I like it because the next step is to merge in VoIP services or videoconferencing or other power features. If we can get a large base of people using to thinking of their computers as telephony devices we can hopefully open a market for some real digital phone services.
Not to mention, it gets people adjusted to the idea of having a home server, which I think every home needs. If you leave it on all the time for answer machine functions it isn't a stretch to add other funtions like media/music server or security/webcam monitor or light/appliance controller.
- JoeShmoe
.
In other words, this effort that went into this coordinated 27-city raid (which took probably tens of thousands of manhours to prepare and execture) could not have been spent elsewhere?
Because I thought we were still at war with terrorism. I thought we were still living with the constant threat of terrorism. Every one of these FBI agents chasing down CD images is one less agent knocking on doors, interviewing potential suspects.
I swear, if there are any attacks or terrorist incidents tomorrow, or the next week, or hell, any time the first question I'll be writing my congressman will be "Where was the FBI?"
I almost hope something does happen. What's it going to take for the FBI to learn their FIRST AND PRIMARY responsability is to safeguard the lives of American citizens...NOT the PROFITS of American corporations.
- JoeShmoe
.
I actually hired a neighborhood kid to do that. A friend of mine was moving out of the area and I decided to make a local mirror of his collection so that I could continue to "borrow" CDs from him. It was around 400 CDs or so that I was interested in ripping but I quickly realized what a major hassle it was.
Then I got an idea and called up another friend and ask if his younger brother (age 13) wanted to earn a little money. I offered to pay $40 to rip them for me. I brought over a stripped down Win98 box with a fast CD-ROM and he got it done that weekend. All he had to do was stick the CD in, wait for CDDB to fill in the names, and click the convert button in MusicMatch or whatever the hell I was using back then. Rinse, repeat.
I mean, kids these days are usually familiar with the process anyway. A completely low-tech solutions but hey, if this is a one time deal why buy hardware that costs ten times as much?
- JoeShmoe
Does anyone else seem to get a sense that in the not-so-distant future the only people who will be allowed to access, examine, copy, quote, share and distribute information will be teachers?
Can I show a movie to a bunch of strangers? No, that constitutes a "public performance" and I would get fined for it. But can teachers show a movie to their class? Apparently they can.
Can I put an a clip from a TV show on my webpage and point out why it's so particularly funny? No, that's illegal copyright infringement and lawyers would have me take it down. But can teachers put a clip from a TV show on their webserver and ask the class to write a ten page paper on the message? Apparently they can.
Can I disassemble an encryption format and post the result for others to examine and duplicate? No, that's a DMCA violation and the FBI would be after me. But can teachers disassemble an encryption format and post an in-depth analysis of how it works (or doesn't work)? Apparently they can.
I could go on, but it seems to me that in the coming years, I might want to think about moving towards "Education" as an excuse for information exchange.
Don't have a warez group. Have a "copy protection analysis and discussion" group. Don't have a TVRip group. Have a "Pop culture examination and analysis" group.
I mean, who's an authority on something? Who is a teacher except someone who can explain concepts to those who do not yet know them?
If Felten seems to enjoy some magical protection, in the eyes of the court, why can't any other teacher? Why can't I become a teacher and enjoy the same protection?
- JoeShmoe
To quote my own post:
"I'm not talking about one business fighting with another; can anyone think of a single case in the last twenty years where an individual or non-profit group was victorious in an action brought by a large corporation"
US vs. Microsoft was caused by monopoly behavior against Netscape and/or Sun. Consumers for years have been screaming bloody murder about MS tactics but the government never moved until other business suddenly fell victim to the same thing.
So I don't think this really answers my question.
Not to mention...the decision was reversed essentially on appeal and so it's not a happy anti-business ruling in any sense. Microsoft might even end up putting 2000 or XP in thousands of schools around the country as "punishment".
- JoeShmoe
_
I just saw over on CNet this article:
m l
http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-8011238.ht
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks like New York Appeals Court is saying one thing and California Appeals Court is saying the opposite?
Pure speech versus non-expressive speech...which is the accurate description of DeCSS?
It seems to me that since we have two conflicting rulings between states, there would be a pressing interest in escalating the issue to the federal level? Or is it possible for two different standards to be applied in two different regions?
Suddenly I'm a lot happier to be a Californian, even though it was the f'n studios that started the whole DeCSS fiasco to begin with...
- JoeShmoe
_
Oh yeah, that's right. Let's allow the DoJ to arrest Felten and throw him in jail like Skylerov. Let's allow the DoJ to confiscate all of Felten's computers and equipment for years while they stall through the trial process. Let's allow the DoJ to make Felten liable for any infringing action that results from his research. Oh THEN he has a right to bring the matter before a judge?
RIAA says "publish and we'll sue you or worse, we'll tell the FBI your research is a circumvention device" Why is it frivilous for Felten to come before a judge and say "hey, do they really have a case?"
There has got to be some legal basis for preventative measures. Look at trade secret laws. There doesn't even need to be damages...just the mere threat of damages is enough for a judge can issue a restraining order. So why doesn't this work in the other direction? Why can't a judge issue a ruling that says "No, the DMCA doesn't apply to what you are doing Felten, carry on." Why does Felten have to do things the hard way and martyr himself?
Maybe there would be a whole lot less civil disobidience if there was a way for someone to get a ruling before actually breaking the law. Who exactly are you supposed to believe? An unfair law or the judges who interpret it? I read the law and see permission to do something. Big Company reads the same law and sees the exact opposite. Does the FBI listen to my side of the case when Big Company asks them to arrest me? Do they say "oh yeah, good point, you are free to go?" No. Even when Adobe "recanted" Dmitri was still in prison. So then if it's not up to the executive branch, it must be up to the judicial branch. So that is why Felten and the EFF went to court...to ask the judicial branch what this law means. But rather than study it, hear testimony, call experts, and finally make a ruling...the judge ducks the issue.
Oh, and by the way, wtf kind of crack are you smoking to make the statement that judges "get to where they are through being throughly qualified for the position" Judicial appointments are as based on merit as the electoral college is. They are done completely down political and ideological lines...ie picking judges that are gonna vote the way you want them to vote on the issues that matter to your group. But whether is is Democrat or Republician it seems to me there is an appalling pro-business bias in the judges that have been chosen in the last couple decades. Can anyone even remember an anti-business ruling? I'm not talking about one business fighting with another; can anyone think of a single case in the last twenty years where an individual or non-profit group was victorious in an action brought by a large corporation? Are there any success stories?
For crying out loud...ten? twenty? years ago the Supreme Court of the United States rules that Hustler magazine had the right to embarass the hell out of a religious figure because, distasteful as the comments were, they were free speech. What do you think the odds are that the same case would have even made it to the Supreme Court if Hustler had instead embarassed a major corporation?
SDMI hadn't even picked a secure music format. There was *NO* chance of damage or IP theft and still they pissed their pants over Felten's analysis. Why? Because it showed what a ludicrous idea watermarking is. Reactions like this only helps prove that the real intent of the DMCA is not to protect IP or prevent piracy but to prevent the publication or dissemination of any information that embarasses or otherwise injures the reputation of a major corporation and its products.
- JoeShmoe
Really. Do the issues raised not even give them PAUSE for a moment? This is a professor we are talking about...okay, on the face I can understand the prejudice that exists againt 2600 (even though I also understand the irony of that statement since a judge shouldn't have let his or her own belief affect their judgement) and see why that case was dismissed...but the Felton case?
WTF???
This is a goddam professor we are talking about. Speech and professor goes together like bribery and politician. If a professor stands up as says "hey, i'm not able to do my job" what the hell kind of idiot judge says "whatever".
I thought for sure this was a silver bullet against the DMCA and I can't believe that the EFF is already fighting an uphill battle on what seems blately a first ammendment issue to any first year law student.
Seriously W-T-F
Can judges be impeached? Can they have their positions revoked? I'm pretty sure the Supreme Court Justices are appointed for life but what about the lower levels? Is there any way we can start a campaign to get idiots like this off the bench? These people are clearly not representing the people, the Constitution, or anything except Executive Branch and Legislative Branch interests.
RULINGS LIKE THESE ARE DESTROYING THE F'N CHECKS AND BALANCES SYSTEM
Unreal.
- (ANGRY) JoeShmoe
The thing that is stupid about Weakest Link is that people are penalized for not knowing EVERY single question. I mean, how retarded is that? In every game show I've ever seen there has always been a way to defer one or two questions on subjects you don't know. Jeopardy you get to pick the category. Millionaire you get the lifelines.
Weakest Link is stupid because it is completely random luck. You either get asked what color is clover or who invented the little plastic thing that holds the ends of your shoelaces together. This forces people to become paranoid and bank at ridiculously low levels. Most people barely let the pot hit $5000 before yelling "BANK!"
Here's how it should work:
Answering the question right adds a link and increases the pot. Answer the question wrong and the pot disappears completely. Say "BANK" (or "PASS" or whatever) and the pot gets banked and resets to zero and play moves onto the next person.
That way, the bank has a real chance to grow. So it costs more money, boo hoo hoo. Millionaire gives away more in a single night than Weakest Link does in a week. It is just plain anti-climatic to see someone fight his way through this whole Darwinian process only to walk away with the paltry sum of $30,000 and change.
- JoeShmoe
It's more expensive because it's better
It would be nice, but you have to understand that it's not worth the extra $20
Whuh?
You want to target the high end consumer...and to that end you make an admittedly more expensive (but better!) unit...but then balk at a $20 feature? Did you ask your sample group if they'd rather have a plain old backlit LCD display but get the digital port? I know I would.
How long is this device supposed to last? True, maybe there aren't a lot of people right now that have digital inputs on their stereo, but what about in a couple years? Five years? Ten years? The explosive growth of DVD is causing a lot of people to reexamine their home theater systems and upgrade to digital sound.
One possibility is maybe find a convenient place on the mainboard for an expansion card? My cheap, cheap $50 SBLive didn't come with an optical output (only SPDIF), but i was able to get a $8 daughtercard from a Taiwanese website that gave me me a TOSLink output for my MD player. So maybe you could find a place to put a few pins and then offer customers a digital output option? That way the price increase is minimized and those who want the feature can pay extra for it.
- JoeShmoe
Except this devices is hand-made in a garage in lots of a couple hundred each. This isn't meant to disparage the quality, but as such it might not be available when you want it where you live.
In fact the website says "The SliMP3 is not yet ready for sale. If you would like to receive an e-mail when our first units become available, please submit the form below." so I guess right now it isn't available at all.
Plus it's about $70 more expensive even though it contains less hardware (price of hand assembly).
However, both the SliMP3 and SonicBlue suffer from the same fatal flaw...lack of digital output. What is the point in streaming full quality 256Kbps digitally across my house only to lose that quality in the last few feet due to a cheap-as-you-can-mass-produce DAC? I don't care if you use Monster cable, analog just isn't digital and if I'm spending $200+ bucks then shouldn't I get the full solution?
I think both these devices should be updated to include a TOSlink/coaxial output (preferably both). Most people just run speaker wire across their house so these devices both seem to target power users/audiophiles.
I'd also like to point out there is a HUGE market for a similar device that can play video files, not just audio files. No one wants to put a computer in their home theater because it is too bulky and noisy. Wouldn't it be awesome to keep all your movies on a server in the computer room and then stream them to some small little elegant and quiet device just like these audio players?
I'd certainly pay for something like that.
- JoeShmoe
So where is the mirror of this program your friend wrote? It sounds very interesting. Even if I'm only able to get Pong ported over to the PSX hardware that sounds pretty darn cool.
Typical Sony overreaction. There are plenty of different boot loaders (CDs that you boot, then swap out for a CD-R copy of a game) and plenty of mod chips (chips you solder onto your PSX board to force it to ignore PS-specific boot sector). If anyone is interested in playing pirated games they are already doing in. Buy a mod chip for $30 bucks and then rent all the PSX games you can from Blockbuster, copy them, and presto instant game collection. So if Sony things this little program is going to lead to any more game copying than already exists they are clueless beyond belief. More likely they are afraid people will be able to write quality games WITHOUT having to pay the Sony tax to become an official PSX licensee.
Meanwhile this tool could be very useful for this like porting MAME over to the PSX (would be nifty for the PS1 to make a portable MAME machine) and as you put it, writing your own games.
So, please tell me your friend passed the tool around a bit before Sony shut him down? What was the file name so we can know to keep an eye out should it just "happen" to appear on Kazaa/eDonkey/LimeWire/etc (maybe, oh, sometime this week)?
- JoeShmoe
I'd just like to point out a couple things:
1) Back in 1995-1996 I was downloading plenty of movies at 9600 or 14.4 baud. They were all in the old ViVo format (.VIV which was purchased by Real a couple years later). I think the first one I ever downloaded was Boobwatch. Each movie was only about 60-100MB in size and could easily be downloaded overnight. The bitrate was HORRIBLE but back the thrill of downloading an ENTIRE MOVIE made up for it.
2) My only 486 could never in its wildest dreams play DivX, which is MPEG-4 and requires a crapload of processing power...but even a lowly 486 can handle MPEG-1 or low bitrate RealMedia. So I can believe it's possible to watch movies on even an old Commodore PC clone.
3) The warez scene outside the G8 looks completely different. There is virtually no sympathy for copyright interests, especially US ones. You are more than likely to find major warez sites being run from state-owned resources (I myself was once offered access to a site that resolved to something under iif.hu and, judging from the amount of information it contained, had obviously been running for months). The scene is usually very close knit and tight. If you only have one or two ISPs then you get to know the staff pretty intimately, and from there its very easy to develop a "communal software resource".
I think a good way to look at computer users in these underdeveloped countries is to compare them to HAM radio users. They have a piece of hardware that connects them to a larger community of users, and sooner or later they'll run into someone in their own area, and from there they can exchange contact with others they have met and boom, a local user group is born.
- JoeShmoe
Be careful what you do with your final product. According to their FAQ they have patented this process.
However, since they don't list the patent number, I'm wondering if it's merely patent pending. What would it be under "Patent for automated mute button"? I'm surprised that this hasn't been brought up by someone already.
Of course, before you go and rail on MovieMask for frivolous patents, consider that they are planning to release this program for "any Linux based system" (from the same FAQ). I'm also surprise no one has mentioned that! Now, do the two things cancel each other out?
Regarding the idea itself...I would like to see a third option beside mute and fast-forward: zoom. This is what a lot of TV releases do to allow a scene with important content but hide objectionable content. If the woman talking is topless, zoom in to cut off everything below the neck. If I guy is going to be shot to a bloody stump, zoom to focus on the look of horror and not the blood gushing from the squibs. Many, many objectionable scenes can be fixed in this manner.
- JoeShmoe
This type of CD-R/RW usage has been available (in Windows) for years via third-party software like Adaptec/Roxio's DirectCD or the NTI's FileCD and so on. CD players already support packet writing! Why is Microsoft, IBM et. al. taking about reengineering the CD from at such a low level? Doesn't it just require someone to write a Linux version of DirectCD/FileCD? Why can't we just format CD-R/RW discs with the UDF file system that DVD's already use instead of inventing a brand new one?
Also, I'm not sure I even like the idea of this becoming the "default" behavior for CD writers. I strongly dislike the overhead involved in formatting. I find that a packet writing CD-R/RW hold about 100MB less. I'd rather have the full capacity. I mean, if you are using this thing for business backup (which seems to be the primary argument for needing Linux support) then you are only going to be burning once a day, so why not just burn a full 650/700MB worth of data as a single data track?
- JoeShmoe
Try typing "Trek" into your favorite P2P client. Here are a couple interesting Trek files that I turned up:
Funny - Star Trek Cast Swearing.mpg
(outtakes from TNG of various cast members saying bad words)
Trekky - TNG Parody.mov
(ancient TNG parody where Wesley gets blown up, Picard screws Beverley, all done in Premiere 2.0 on a Max IIci)
Picard & Data blooper.mpg
(two bloopers involving Picard and Data scenes)
Totally Naked Blooper.mpg
(sorry. no nudity, it was a Data contraction blooper from the episode Totally Naked)
star_trek_voyager_outtakes.mpg
(not just voyager, also outtakes from DS9)
doors.rm
(door-related mishaps from TOS)
If you can't find them on your P2P of choice, ask around on one of the many Trek channels on EFNet or Dalnet.
- JoeShmoe
That's like write-protecting the entire drive. It's stupid and foolish.
Technically, the default in Windows NT is to allow Administrators access to the registry, but deny Users. But even then, that's talking about the System registry (HKEY_CLASSES, HKEY_LOCALMACHINE etc). They can still access their own registry hive (HKEY_CURRENTUSER). Any time they change a setting like background color or window placement (provided those rights haven't been taken away by a system policy) is saved there.
You wouldn't write protect an entire drive to keep people from messing with the Windows directory. Just block off that directory.
Likewise, the registry has the same kind of access controls. Give developers read/write access to a specific key in HKEY_LOCALMACHINE\SOFTWARE. Technically, this is where they should be storing registry settings anyway.
- JoeShmoe
Oh PLEASE.
They start over from scratch, eliminate major previous Civ concepts, invent this completely new (and untested) culture paradigm and you are faulting me for asking them to change the map layout?
Everyone knows the major time drag is game development is in the artwork. Converting a square grid into a hex grid is simple because they are both perfect tesselations. Just cut the artwork in different places.
And I don't get your gunpowder comment at all. Asking more more realism in a game profession to take Civ to new heights of realism isn't unreasonable at all.
- JoeShmoe
Is it just me or does anyone else see the irony of that statement?
- JoeShmoe
If only Citrix wasn't so stupid they would realize that the best way to keep Microsoft out of the Terminal Server space would be to adopt more competitive pricing.
On the one hand you have Citrix at $5000 for 20 users. On the other hand you have Microsoft for $0 for unlimited users ($75 for any user not running Win2000).
That's utterly insane. Why do they make such an absurdly high barrier to entry? Microsoft begins Server and Small Business Server at the 5-client license level so why on earth is Citrix starting at 20? They are immediately discounting almost all of the small businesses out there.
Knowing now that I can't run 256 colors on Windows 2000 Terminal Services...I'm not about to recommend this mom and pop shop plunk down five grand for Citrix...i'm going to recommend they pay a few hundred and upgrade to Windows XP server.
One day, like Novell, Citrix will wake up and wonder where all their customers went. Only then will they realize that people aren't interested in paying a premium for a market leader when Microsoft has a "good enough" option available for free.
Feh! I was already upset I had to install Windows 2000 instead of Windows NT 4.0 Terminal Server...now I gotta install XP! Bleah!
- JoeShmoe
Unfortunately, a small shop like this one cannot afford to fork out the money for the server hardware, Windows 2000 Server AND on top of that, Citrix licensing.
If I could have my wish I'd just X-server the whole thing but unfortunately this application is strictly closed-source Windows-only.
I can't believe Microsoft hardcoded this. I mean, they are basically using the same code for their remote administration tools yet it lacks this most basic option that pcAnywhere and VNC has had forever.
Unbelievable.
- JoeShmoe
Service Level Agreement.
Basically, what is and is not covered in your support contract. For big orders, you get to negotiate your own EULA not just take what they hand you.
For example, an SLA might cover finacial losses due to system failure, whereas every normal EULA under the sun absolves hardware vendors of liability for secondary losses.
- JoeShmoe
Well see it's not that simple.
Draw yourself a 5 by 5 square grid. That represents the range of motion 2 spaces from the center square. But it's a square. Which means for some reason these mythical Civ units can somehow move 50% farther if they travel in one direction than they can in another. Now consider an 11 by 11 grid representing the range of motion of some units and you see how this is a bit ridiculous.
Civ designers understood this and that's why cities have such a funky shape (that same 5 by 5 grid with the four corners cut off). This crude "sphere" represents what an area of influence around a central point should look like.
Part of a rich gaming experience is realism and accuracy. By allowing units to move farther on a diagonal, it's cheating. A unit can traverse a whole continent in a couple turns if it moves along the diagonal.
Not to mention, what kind of rich gaming experience is it if you put a unit out there to guard something, expecting that attackers would have to go through it...but finding that by travelling along diagonals they can simply go around it?
If a unit is supposed to have a "sphere of influence" that they are guarding, you need a hexagonal grid. On a hex grid, a unit is surrounded by six spaces and creates an effective blockade. On a square grid, a unit is surrounded by only four spaces (N S E W, diagonals aren't protected in Civ).
Given that the goal seems to be emulating spheres of city/unit/artifact influence, a hexagonal grid is the most accurate way of doing it.
- JoeShmoe
Is there anyone else that gets as irritated with square grids as I do?
A hex grid more closely resembles a "circle" of influence. With a square grid you have to cut corners off a square. This results in a whole bunch of funky problems:
1) It's impossible to put your cities adjacent to each other without wasting space. The best you can do is waste two spaces per group of four cities. This ain't bad but odds are that some important resource is going to be stuck on one of those wasted squares. A hex grid would make it possible to pack cities close together in several different designs while still not wasting any space.
2) Units get jammed up on enemy units because they are diagonally adjacent. It's absurd because while the computer won't let you move sideways when there is a unit at the diagonal, you can move down and diagonally to end up in the same place. With a hex grid, movement from each space basically forks into two opposite directions. So it's very easy to go around units without getting caught in these kinds of bogus traps.
3) People argue that square grids are easier to navigate with a standard keypad. This is entirely untrue. Other strat games that have hex grids still use the keypad, they simply use either the top and bottom row or left and right column (depending on how the hex grid is oriented). The bonus is that you have three extra buttons now to control movement.
The continued use of the square grid is the one thing about Civ/CivII/AlphaC that I absolutely detest. I really wish someone at Firaxis could have thought to change that with this upcoming CivIII game...but perhaps the next one will finally be this way.
- JoeShmoe