Standard disclaimer. IANA Particle Physicist, so you may be more credentialed than me. But Bussard's work answers your questions.
As for the polywell scheme it is nonsense.
Your argument breaks down into two claims:
(1) confinement and losses:
If you are to confine a plasma using a magnetic field you will need a very strong field to avoid heat losses, period.
(2) neutron / gamma ray secondary effects on the reactor:
vessel exposed to neutron radiation even stronger than what you have in the core of a traditional nuclear powerplant
I believe Bussard addresses both points in his Google Tech Talk. The overall organization of the talk is to point out how his team found a way to improve the yield of the reactor to the point that the confinement is efficient and the losses don't outweigh the energy output.
And Bussard specifically identifies the yield using P-11B fusion. He did D-D fusion in the prototype, but P-11B fusion solves the problem with high-energy neutrons.
Even if he could get his scheme to confine the plasma, he has not proposed any way to get the fusion products out of the plasma, how to deal with the neutron radiation, nor how to make it produce enough excess power to be useful as a powerplant.
The helium coming out of the D-D fusion is removed by an external filtration process (centrifuge). He talks about it in the Google Tech Talk. The same would seem to apply in a P-11B reactor, although he doesn't explicitly state how he would design that type of reactor. The confinement and potential for excess power generation is the focus of the talk.
In summary, I'd like to go into the specifics with you. Can you please post a follow-up?
Thanks for that post. I agree with you that in Second Life, someone can "grief" you and it's not very hard for them to cause "bad things" to happen to your avatar, which might include something akin to rape. It's very possible.
Rape is a serious charge. And this blogger isn't even the defendant. But I am glad that, at least, the police are investigating. What is it with slashdotters that makes them all angry when someone in the U.S. is treated "guilty until found innocent," but then when someone in Europe complains and the police try to investigate (without assuming any guilt), all the slashdotters start to complain, "you can't investigate an internet crime!"
You can't have it both ways. The police are either going to just throw people in jail without a trial, or they are going to have to investigate complaints. Pick one.
Whine, whine.:-) Of course, in a community development environment, that just might get someone to fix your bug.
Just for kicks, imagine if what you said was:
I have found (IE 6.0) to be prone to (get exploited) every so often. It is probably because of the (Microsoft marketing strategy) or something. I click the submit on the error report but nothing has fixed it. I'm about to uninstall again and go back to (IE 3.0) for a while.
As you have requested, we will make available for Internet file transfer copies of the software used in the USDTV receiver that is covered by these licenses. Unfortunately, your request has caught us at a bad time. The USDTV development offices are currently in the process of moving to a new location, so we do not at this time have a server to host copies of the software to download. Once our move is completed and our full Internet service is restored, we will set up a site with the requested software available. (... snip...)
Thanks,
Jim Burmeister
Now, that's pretty close to what you said
claimed they were having technical difficulties and would release the source post-haste
But in my opinion, what's really going on here is a little bait-n-switch, a little corporate scheming, in the form of a company that violates the GPL and then declares bankruptcy. Corporate law at first glance would seem to indicate that there's no one to sue: the liability dissolves with the company.
From what I could tell, Jim was under the assumption that he would be relocating closer to USDTV HQ when he responded to Tim Rikers. But within a week, he discovered he wasn't working for USDTV any more. Tim continued to contact USDTV, and they have not done anything since. I am surprised Tim hasn't updated the wiki page with his later attempts to discuss the matter with USDTV.
At any rate, one of the last paragraphs of the open letter at usdtv.com says:
Our passion was to help families save money on their cable TV bills and provide a service that had a higher quality of cable networks.
At midnight Pacific Time tonight, I'll change the grammar error to "provide a service that had a higher quality than cable networks." If there were any intention of actually releasing the GPL source code used, I can assure you there are no technical barriers (as of Wed Mar 28 12:00:00 AM PDT).
Thanks; I know about the eBay scene. But for those who don't want to pay the seller fee, or who aren't thinking about selling theirs on eBay for whatever reason, here's another way to make some money ( $75 of course, since that's what Cable Comm is selling them for)
How many subscribers would be able to flash the firmware without bricking their box even if they had the source code and binaries?
[it happens, sometimes, even to the geek who is sure he knows what he is doing]
If by some mishap you have bricked your box, connect the appropriate Flash programmer to the JTAG port on the mainboard, and reprogram the flash. Repeat as necessary until the machine boots again.
I think it's necessary to have the source code so you could test an install of MythTV, for example.
Second question:
Where in the contract does it say that these set top boxes are user-serviceable? If they are not, then the code becomes of intellectual interest only.
Many customers received their Hisense box officially just a few weeks ago, when USDTV sent out a notice that leased boxes could be kept by the subscriber. They never signed a contract limiting their rights to modify the box (now that they own it).
Also, as long as USDTV is in violation of the GPL (and they are -- see discussion above), obtaining the source code is in the interest of all who would defend GPL software, since USDTV and TiVo have demonstrated a serious loophole by which many manufacturers might try to abuse the GPL.
Third question:
What makes paying for a USB key differet from paying for a CableCard to access and unlock subscription content and services?
I agree with you. A USB key that would unlock subscription material should be paid for. But this USB key changes a Hisense box so that it will not go into "Please Activate" mode at the next power outage. Further, the key removes some of the proprietary code from the box, so that it only receives free ATSC broadcasts. The USB key does not contain source code -- but that's my point: USDTV is still in violation of the GPL.
Exactly right. The licensed code on the set top box is removed when you re-flash the firmware using the Free-To-Air update on the USB key.
What if they had licensed lots of other code and disobeyed the GPL by merging from them both?
The only for-sure GPL violation was the Linux kernel, although I'm fairly certain they have GNU bash in the firmware as well. The programs which are not open source -- well, they won't have to release source for those. But they must release the code for the kernel and any included GNU utilities.
USDTV has been doing a little of both: selling and leasing boxes to customers. But at this point, they are going into their second (or, depending on how you look at it, third) bankruptcy because the CEO and the president of the company have been... well, doing some shady things.
Most of the (former) employees of USDTV (full disclosure: I was) were doing what it took to get a decent alternative to cable off the ground. It seemed like a good idea: send digital video over the air on unused bandwidth, capitalize on the switch to ATSC broadcasting, and earn a little revenue with some extra offerings, like PVR, pay-per-view, and some of the most popular cable channels. It was a very limited channel selection (plus all the free HDTV channels), but there were almost no infrastructure costs.
But the company had a serious problem with "too many chiefs, not enough indians" and after the second round of VC funding, the "chiefs" couldn't drum up any more loans. So now they're shutting down. There are lots of small startups in Utah that fail. It gives Utah a bad name in VC circles.
Tim Rikers (who does bzFlag) has been in contact with the company for some time, trying to obtain GPL compliance in the form of source code that will run on the HiSense box. If any of you out there would like to sell me your HiSense box, we can probably work out a deal. They're very capable of doing something like MythTV. As far as I know, USDTV has stalled until they're closing the doors.
And now, they're making you pay $30 to prevent your box from going into "Please Activate" mode, since none of the boxes will receive activations anymore. (Technically, they won't go into "please activate" until the first power outage.) In my opinion, they were in violation of the GPL for selling a GNU/Linux-based system to some of their customers, and now that they're giving the rest of the boxes to the customers (sort of by default), they are still in violation of the GPL. There are no GPL notices anywhere in the system, unless you connect by a serial console (I can give you pinouts, and maybe a password or two) -- then you'll get the login: prompt.
I don't think a lawsuit is going to do a whole lot of good. But I think if anyone tried to acquire USDTV's IP and sue someone or a website doing hacking on the box, they'd make SCO look like a profitable venture. What is it with Utah businesses?!
Well, it's true that some programmers are having to do extra work. I'll be the first to admit, Microsoft has a decade more experience building world-class development environments, and they've got Sony beat. No problem.
But the Cell is being pushed by IBM, not just Sony. What I hope will happen (see, I'm pretty anti-Microsoft) is that the Havok engine, along with other libraries, will be developed for the Cell. However, havok.com is not likely to release source code. What's missing, in my opinion, is the forum for PS3 game devs to get together and share in the effort of producing really fast Cell code. I'm sure the chip is capable of the same level of performance as the 360.
So, yeah, I agree with you. Microsoft has not only about a year lead in the market, but an easier platform to develop for. I just don't like the company.
That's just it. Nobody actually needs the label. The label had their niche, especially back when they helped drive several significant trends in music. But now everything they do seems just more self-inflicted misery (see article about RIAA deposing 10-year-old girl).
The dot-com boom, and maybe dot-com 2.0, are about new ideas -- some good, some bad, and a lot of vaporware to go with it. But businesses have always had to change. IBM has done a good job. Do you think we'll ever see Microsoft covenant not to sue an open source project? Will we ever be able to accept source code from them?
Change will happen, with or without them. I can imagine how different things would be for Sony BMG, EMI, Warner, and Universal (and all the other RIAA labels) had they only listened to what was happening at every U.S. University in 1999. Mp3's. Napster.
I think this might sound like flamebait, but then, I see that as the problem. The RIAA just passes us all off as flamebait and trolls, pirates or a wallet with two legs -- so does Microsoft sometimes, so does the FBI sometimes... I'm not really a secular humanist, just amazed that something as plain as the nose on their face can be downplayed, fudded, and through hundreds of board meetings relegated to a "non-issue"... and then inevitably they are proven wrong.
Money must lobotomize the cortex on some people. It certainly doesn't have that effect on all people. I'm not going to try to even cite a great example here, but just an example.
Seriously though, www.tiger.dk has "Tiger Music" under Voksentiger (translate that!) with a form to sign up for emails. I guess I better learn more Danish.
believe me, the processor has stuff that's directly against good programming design for video games, the size of the memory available to each process is a big problem
It is true that an effective memory size of 128Kb per processor (SPU, needs to be split in half for DMA double-buffering) limits what you can do in one chunk of code. But I think adisakp said it best:
All the papers out there from IBM and Sony suggest PREFERRED METHODS which are different than your implied limitation. They advocate cooperatively running multiple small task (dozens or even hundreds) rather than dedicating cores to fixed tasks and to double-buffer data (or even code) to mask DMA latencies.
Now I understand what you're saying about limited memory. I haven't tried to fit data+code in 128Kb since DOS, and it could mean a return to assembly coding for some of what I'm writing. But the Cell isn't going away, and the memory size on the SPUs will increase next year. In the meantime, evaluate the cost/benefit, talk it over with somebody, etc., etc... and then cut some code.
There's a good chance if you jump in on one of the projects anyway as a volunteer, you will be in a better position to get paid next year. First of all, it will save you the trouble of getting accepted as a SoCoder. Secondly, you will still gain the experience of working with top "developmers". And several of the SoC projects are back for their second year, so those would be good projects to work with. You could even (with a little research) find out who is chiefly responsible this year for selecting applicants, and ask them what they look for. They might not be in charge next year, but all of this information and practice will give you the kind of edge you'll need to accomplish one of two things:
Successfully get paid next year for Summer of Code
Get hired for a summer internship at Google (which will pay a lot more)
Well they can't write something like "We built yet another piece of programmable hardware" can they?
No, but they should. Not that I dislike Raytheon inherently, but they are certainly spinning this press release pretty hard. It's just programmable hardware. It's an attempt to catch the attention of the government because there are two Military-Industrial coalitions bidding right now for the military's next generation satellite system (which will be a contract worth tens of billions of dollars for about the next decade).
Since the press release is so light on detail, obviously the actual hardware isn't that impressive. Note things like these quotes:
In laboratory testing MONARCH outperformed the Intel quad-core Xeon chip by a factor of 10
Oh, really? And how many libraries of congress per fortnight is that?
for such purposes as global positioning systems, airborne and space radar and video processing systems
Target audience, right there.
64 gigaflops (floating point operations per second) with more than 60 gigabytes per second of memory bandwidth and more than 43 gigabytes per second of off-chip data bandwidth.
This is at least a little bit of information. However, those numbers are similar to current generation CPUs. I think the PS3 Cell can outperform this chip, so unless we have some power numbers it's unimpressive.
It's not a big surprise. It's just a press release and a slashvertisement.
Music execs have got so much more money than anybody else that they have almost forgotten what it is, and pursue it only in a kneejerk reaction. But I agree with you. They want money, now and in perpetuity.
Examine the following:
money (J) = time (s) * work (Watts)
For the proof of that, I refer you to (1) your electric meter, (2) your paycheck, (3) a highschool or college grading system (where X months and Y assignments = A grade), etc.
To show what the music execs desire most, start with the axiom "love of money is the root of all evil": money (J) = sqrt(evil)
Square both sides: money^2 = | evil |
Now substitute the initial assumption: time^2 * work^2 = | evil |
Simplify: time^2 = | evil | / work^2
It becomes obvious that an absolute evil | evil | that offers no useful work will produce an unbounded increase in time. Music execs will continue to extend copyright using a time^2 formula. This implies that they plan to produce no work until the end of time to maintain a non-zero money.
Perhaps we should send them to jail for tax evasion.
Interesting that you should single out the Mac. That would seem to be the "reading between the lines" that Ozzie is not saying, and for a reason!
You *ALSO* have to be a company that people *LIKE*. (note the Mac and PC ad campaign among other things)
The problem with what you're saying is that Microsoft has tried (see: XBox, Zune) to get people to like their product. And the first thing they learned was drop the Microsoft brand from the product. (Especially obvious with the Zune.)
As inevitable as the "New Kid In Town" phenomenon is the phenomenon of "bondage, even by silken ties, will inevitably chafe". It's pretty obvious that a lot of people have a bondage fettish, but once Billy has been on top for a decade, we're starting to see a sea change, and everybody seems to be clamoring at once, "my turn on top."
So is that Apple's / Google's secret marketing strategy by going with Intel CPUs, iPods with light DRM or none at all? And Google's "Do No Evil," China Censorship aside, seems to be clearly focused at winning customers by letting customers "be on top," a complete reversal of Microsoft's "Ein Reich, Ein Volk, Ein Fuhrer."
(I feel a reference to German psychology is relevant, since the entire post is most Freudian in nature. Apologies to Godwin.)
Post SP1 Vista will finally be an OS worth upgrading to, but that's still quite a way off and consumers are IMHO much better off sticking with XP. By then Vienna will be out so why bother?
Because Microsoft will announce the End of Life (EOL) for XP. And Vienna will be the same nightmare Vista is now.
You, Sir, are a genius. Your description of music and what the member companies of the RIAA are doing is spot-on. They never were in business to improve, or even enable, music. They are just trying to maximize their profit. Wish I had mod points.
This article seems to be one that a lot of slashdotters have actually read.:-) I posted farther up the thread about why Chiariglione is actually a tool of the recording industry.
But you're right, I should go read wikipedia now on the details of the GSM implementation.
The reason why the article says SDMI is "ending" is because SDMI was a "solution" to the MP3 problem of the late '90's. When Eric Scheirer wrote the article for MP3.com, he had this to say:
"The solution is to get the technology companies into bed with the record industry. But the consumer-electronics industry knows a hard lesson that the RIAA has yet to learn: regardless of the business model, it has to start with value to the consumer. What it all adds up to is this: the floodgates are opening. Portable devices will be huge for Christmas this year [Article published Oct 15 1999]; they will all play MP3, and none of them will be SDMI-compliant in any way that matters."
So if SDMI (Mr. Chiariglione 's baby) was truly failing in October of 1999, and MP3 was going to be the wave of the future, the core problem was DRM.
But Mr. Chiariglione had a rebuttal for that article (also on mp3.com), just like he has a rebuttal for Jobs today.
Moreover, in contrast to your report on October 15, SDMI is not merely some theoretical possibility. I am sure you have seen the same announcements I have-advertisements and other public statements that announce the intention of some leading manufacturing companies to produce portable devices complying with the SDMI specification.
Mr. Chiariglione is convinced that SDMI will be a success.
Finally, read the Wikipedia article on SDMI for the rest of the story:
Scheirer's comments proved to be correct; the SDMI has been inactive since May 18, 2001.
Of course, MSNBC is just quoting the AP wire (you have to look at the copyright at the bottom to see this).
But even if Jobs is just doing this to get the EU off his back, you have to admit, this has made DRM a front-page issue. That's diametrically opposed to the approach Microsoft (with Vista) or the RIAA would prefer. They want to pull a fast one and sneak DRM into every part of Joe Sixpack's life without him even knowing it (until he gets his first C&D letter).
So whatever Jobs' motives, I think this is a good thing. Most of the articles I've read on the subject agree that DRM is a bad thing. The "public" is getting ready to kick out the RIAA, and I've got my front-row seat.
Purchasing music from iTMS means:... playing it on an iPod? Where did you get that idea? It means playing it in iTunes. At that point, assuming you are a strict DMCA-abiding anonymous coward, your next step is... Burn to CD. Re-rip. Why would you buy a 128kbps AAC anyway, if you were concerned about lossy encoding? So you now re-rip to a 256kbps mp3 (pretty much overkill) and you'll have the same quality as your original 128kbps AAC, no DRM, and you are not in violation of the DMCA. You have not circumvented a protection measure because you used iTunes to create a non-DRMed copy.
Slashdot Mirror
Your argument breaks down into two claims:
(1) confinement and losses:
(2) neutron / gamma ray secondary effects on the reactor:
I believe Bussard addresses both points in his Google Tech Talk. The overall organization of the talk is to point out how his team found a way to improve the yield of the reactor to the point that the confinement is efficient and the losses don't outweigh the energy output.
And Bussard specifically identifies the yield using P-11B fusion. He did D-D fusion in the prototype, but P-11B fusion solves the problem with high-energy neutrons.
The helium coming out of the D-D fusion is removed by an external filtration process (centrifuge). He talks about it in the Google Tech Talk. The same would seem to apply in a P-11B reactor, although he doesn't explicitly state how he would design that type of reactor. The confinement and potential for excess power generation is the focus of the talk.
In summary, I'd like to go into the specifics with you. Can you please post a follow-up?
Thanks for that post. I agree with you that in Second Life, someone can "grief" you and it's not very hard for them to cause "bad things" to happen to your avatar, which might include something akin to rape. It's very possible.
Rape is a serious charge. And this blogger isn't even the defendant. But I am glad that, at least, the police are investigating. What is it with slashdotters that makes them all angry when someone in the U.S. is treated "guilty until found innocent," but then when someone in Europe complains and the police try to investigate (without assuming any guilt), all the slashdotters start to complain, "you can't investigate an internet crime!"
You can't have it both ways. The police are either going to just throw people in jail without a trial, or they are going to have to investigate complaints. Pick one.
Just for kicks, imagine if what you said was:
From what I could tell, Jim was under the assumption that he would be relocating closer to USDTV HQ when he responded to Tim Rikers. But within a week, he discovered he wasn't working for USDTV any more. Tim continued to contact USDTV, and they have not done anything since. I am surprised Tim hasn't updated the wiki page with his later attempts to discuss the matter with USDTV.
At any rate, one of the last paragraphs of the open letter at usdtv.com says: At midnight Pacific Time tonight, I'll change the grammar error to "provide a service that had a higher quality than cable networks." If there were any intention of actually releasing the GPL source code used, I can assure you there are no technical barriers (as of Wed Mar 28 12:00:00 AM PDT).
Thanks; I know about the eBay scene. But for those who don't want to pay the seller fee, or who aren't thinking about selling theirs on eBay for whatever reason, here's another way to make some money ( $75 of course, since that's what Cable Comm is selling them for)
If by some mishap you have bricked your box, connect the appropriate Flash programmer to the JTAG port on the mainboard, and reprogram the flash. Repeat as necessary until the machine boots again.
I think it's necessary to have the source code so you could test an install of MythTV, for example.
Many customers received their Hisense box officially just a few weeks ago, when USDTV sent out a notice that leased boxes could be kept by the subscriber. They never signed a contract limiting their rights to modify the box (now that they own it).
Also, as long as USDTV is in violation of the GPL (and they are -- see discussion above), obtaining the source code is in the interest of all who would defend GPL software, since USDTV and TiVo have demonstrated a serious loophole by which many manufacturers might try to abuse the GPL.
I agree with you. A USB key that would unlock subscription material should be paid for. But this USB key changes a Hisense box so that it will not go into "Please Activate" mode at the next power outage. Further, the key removes some of the proprietary code from the box, so that it only receives free ATSC broadcasts. The USB key does not contain source code -- but that's my point: USDTV is still in violation of the GPL.
The only for-sure GPL violation was the Linux kernel, although I'm fairly certain they have GNU bash in the firmware as well. The programs which are not open source -- well, they won't have to release source for those. But they must release the code for the kernel and any included GNU utilities.
USDTV has been doing a little of both: selling and leasing boxes to customers. But at this point, they are going into their second (or, depending on how you look at it, third) bankruptcy because the CEO and the president of the company have been ... well, doing some shady things.
Most of the (former) employees of USDTV (full disclosure: I was) were doing what it took to get a decent alternative to cable off the ground. It seemed like a good idea: send digital video over the air on unused bandwidth, capitalize on the switch to ATSC broadcasting, and earn a little revenue with some extra offerings, like PVR, pay-per-view, and some of the most popular cable channels. It was a very limited channel selection (plus all the free HDTV channels), but there were almost no infrastructure costs.
But the company had a serious problem with "too many chiefs, not enough indians" and after the second round of VC funding, the "chiefs" couldn't drum up any more loans. So now they're shutting down. There are lots of small startups in Utah that fail. It gives Utah a bad name in VC circles.
Tim Rikers (who does bzFlag) has been in contact with the company for some time, trying to obtain GPL compliance in the form of source code that will run on the HiSense box. If any of you out there would like to sell me your HiSense box, we can probably work out a deal. They're very capable of doing something like MythTV. As far as I know, USDTV has stalled until they're closing the doors.
And now, they're making you pay $30 to prevent your box from going into "Please Activate" mode, since none of the boxes will receive activations anymore. (Technically, they won't go into "please activate" until the first power outage.) In my opinion, they were in violation of the GPL for selling a GNU/Linux-based system to some of their customers, and now that they're giving the rest of the boxes to the customers (sort of by default), they are still in violation of the GPL. There are no GPL notices anywhere in the system, unless you connect by a serial console (I can give you pinouts, and maybe a password or two) -- then you'll get the login: prompt.
I don't think a lawsuit is going to do a whole lot of good. But I think if anyone tried to acquire USDTV's IP and sue someone or a website doing hacking on the box, they'd make SCO look like a profitable venture. What is it with Utah businesses?!
Well, it's true that some programmers are having to do extra work. I'll be the first to admit, Microsoft has a decade more experience building world-class development environments, and they've got Sony beat. No problem.
But the Cell is being pushed by IBM, not just Sony. What I hope will happen (see, I'm pretty anti-Microsoft) is that the Havok engine, along with other libraries, will be developed for the Cell. However, havok.com is not likely to release source code. What's missing, in my opinion, is the forum for PS3 game devs to get together and share in the effort of producing really fast Cell code. I'm sure the chip is capable of the same level of performance as the 360.
So, yeah, I agree with you. Microsoft has not only about a year lead in the market, but an easier platform to develop for. I just don't like the company.
Link, please?
(Currently listening to a free mp3: Surya from "Greet The Sun" - Robert Whitman)
That's just it. Nobody actually needs the label. The label had their niche, especially back when they helped drive several significant trends in music. But now everything they do seems just more self-inflicted misery (see article about RIAA deposing 10-year-old girl).
... and then inevitably they are proven wrong.
The dot-com boom, and maybe dot-com 2.0, are about new ideas -- some good, some bad, and a lot of vaporware to go with it. But businesses have always had to change. IBM has done a good job. Do you think we'll ever see Microsoft covenant not to sue an open source project? Will we ever be able to accept source code from them?
Change will happen, with or without them. I can imagine how different things would be for Sony BMG, EMI, Warner, and Universal (and all the other RIAA labels) had they only listened to what was happening at every U.S. University in 1999. Mp3's. Napster.
I think this might sound like flamebait, but then, I see that as the problem. The RIAA just passes us all off as flamebait and trolls, pirates or a wallet with two legs -- so does Microsoft sometimes, so does the FBI sometimes... I'm not really a secular humanist, just amazed that something as plain as the nose on their face can be downplayed, fudded, and through hundreds of board meetings relegated to a "non-issue"
Money must lobotomize the cortex on some people. It certainly doesn't have that effect on all people. I'm not going to try to even cite a great example here, but just an example.
Where might I sign up for your newsletter, Sir?
Seriously though, www.tiger.dk has "Tiger Music" under Voksentiger (translate that!) with a form to sign up for emails. I guess I better learn more Danish.
It is true that an effective memory size of 128Kb per processor (SPU, needs to be split in half for DMA double-buffering) limits what you can do in one chunk of code. But I think adisakp said it best:
Now I understand what you're saying about limited memory. I haven't tried to fit data+code in 128Kb since DOS, and it could mean a return to assembly coding for some of what I'm writing. But the Cell isn't going away, and the memory size on the SPUs will increase next year. In the meantime, evaluate the cost/benefit, talk it over with somebody, etc., etc... and then cut some code.
Or don't.
- Successfully get paid next year for Summer of Code
- Get hired for a summer internship at Google (which will pay a lot more)
Good luck.No, but they should. Not that I dislike Raytheon inherently, but they are certainly spinning this press release pretty hard. It's just programmable hardware. It's an attempt to catch the attention of the government because there are two Military-Industrial coalitions bidding right now for the military's next generation satellite system (which will be a contract worth tens of billions of dollars for about the next decade).
Since the press release is so light on detail, obviously the actual hardware isn't that impressive. Note things like these quotes:
Oh, really? And how many libraries of congress per fortnight is that?
Target audience, right there.
This is at least a little bit of information. However, those numbers are similar to current generation CPUs. I think the PS3 Cell can outperform this chip, so unless we have some power numbers it's unimpressive.
It's not a big surprise. It's just a press release and a slashvertisement.
Music execs have got so much more money than anybody else that they have almost forgotten what it is, and pursue it only in a kneejerk reaction. But I agree with you. They want money, now and in perpetuity.
Examine the following:
money (J) = time (s) * work (Watts)
For the proof of that, I refer you to (1) your electric meter, (2) your paycheck, (3) a highschool or college grading system (where X months and Y assignments = A grade), etc.
To show what the music execs desire most, start with the axiom "love of money is the root of all evil":
money (J) = sqrt(evil)
Square both sides:
money^2 = | evil |
Now substitute the initial assumption:
time^2 * work^2 = | evil |
Simplify:
time^2 = | evil | / work^2
It becomes obvious that an absolute evil | evil | that offers no useful work will produce an unbounded increase in time. Music execs will continue to extend copyright using a time^2 formula. This implies that they plan to produce no work until the end of time to maintain a non-zero money.
Perhaps we should send them to jail for tax evasion.
The problem with what you're saying is that Microsoft has tried (see: XBox, Zune) to get people to like their product. And the first thing they learned was drop the Microsoft brand from the product. (Especially obvious with the Zune.)
As inevitable as the "New Kid In Town" phenomenon is the phenomenon of "bondage, even by silken ties, will inevitably chafe". It's pretty obvious that a lot of people have a bondage fettish, but once Billy has been on top for a decade, we're starting to see a sea change, and everybody seems to be clamoring at once, "my turn on top."
So is that Apple's / Google's secret marketing strategy by going with Intel CPUs, iPods with light DRM or none at all? And Google's "Do No Evil," China Censorship aside, seems to be clearly focused at winning customers by letting customers "be on top," a complete reversal of Microsoft's "Ein Reich, Ein Volk, Ein Fuhrer."
(I feel a reference to German psychology is relevant, since the entire post is most Freudian in nature. Apologies to Godwin.)
Vendor Lock-In
You, Sir, are a genius. Your description of music and what the member companies of the RIAA are doing is spot-on. They never were in business to improve, or even enable, music. They are just trying to maximize their profit. Wish I had mod points.
I think she is taking some time to find a lawyer to represent her.
PJ, when you read this, I'd like to donate to your cause. I'm waiting for an update on groklaw.
This article seems to be one that a lot of slashdotters have actually read. :-) I posted farther up the thread about why Chiariglione is actually a tool of the recording industry.
But you're right, I should go read wikipedia now on the details of the GSM implementation.
I for one welcome our new DRM-removing overlords, reality distortion field and all.
No, seriously. This can only be good news, regardless of Jobs' motives. Thank you for a great post.
In case you wonder what SDMI was (this was me), and how it relates to Mr. Chiariglione today, hopefully this will save you a little time.
The End of SDMI
The reason why the article says SDMI is "ending" is because SDMI was a "solution" to the MP3 problem of the late '90's. When Eric Scheirer wrote the article for MP3.com, he had this to say:
"The solution is to get the technology companies into bed with the record industry. But the consumer-electronics industry knows a hard lesson that the RIAA has yet to learn: regardless of the business model, it has to start with value to the consumer. What it all adds up to is this: the floodgates are opening. Portable devices will be huge for Christmas this year [Article published Oct 15 1999]; they will all play MP3, and none of them will be SDMI-compliant in any way that matters."
So if SDMI (Mr. Chiariglione 's baby) was truly failing in October of 1999, and MP3 was going to be the wave of the future, the core problem was DRM.
But Mr. Chiariglione had a rebuttal for that article (also on mp3.com), just like he has a rebuttal for Jobs today.
SDMI Checks In
Moreover, in contrast to your report on October 15, SDMI is not merely some theoretical possibility. I am sure you have seen the same announcements I have-advertisements and other public statements that announce the intention of some leading manufacturing companies to produce portable devices complying with the SDMI specification.
Mr. Chiariglione is convinced that SDMI will be a success.
Finally, read the Wikipedia article on SDMI for the rest of the story:
Scheirer's comments proved to be correct; the SDMI has been inactive since May 18, 2001.
Of course, MSNBC is just quoting the AP wire (you have to look at the copyright at the bottom to see this).
But even if Jobs is just doing this to get the EU off his back, you have to admit, this has made DRM a front-page issue. That's diametrically opposed to the approach Microsoft (with Vista) or the RIAA would prefer. They want to pull a fast one and sneak DRM into every part of Joe Sixpack's life without him even knowing it (until he gets his first C&D letter).
So whatever Jobs' motives, I think this is a good thing. Most of the articles I've read on the subject agree that DRM is a bad thing. The "public" is getting ready to kick out the RIAA, and I've got my front-row seat.
I know, I know... don't feed the trolls...
... playing it on an iPod? Where did you get that idea? It means playing it in iTunes. At that point, assuming you are a strict DMCA-abiding anonymous coward, your next step is... Burn to CD. Re-rip. Why would you buy a 128kbps AAC anyway, if you were concerned about lossy encoding? So you now re-rip to a 256kbps mp3 (pretty much overkill) and you'll have the same quality as your original 128kbps AAC, no DRM, and you are not in violation of the DMCA. You have not circumvented a protection measure because you used iTunes to create a non-DRMed copy.
Purchasing music from iTMS means: