Or perhaps he just wrote that comment because he was trolling since his original message wasn't moded down as far as I can tell. He appears to be just trying to stir up controversy.
Like I said, I don't know the specifics, but as far as glasses go, you take my glasses you are coming in contact with me. Even if I don't start spouting blood out of numerous wounds, it's assault, perhaps even theft. Since the glasses he was/is wearing are probably worth over a grand, I believe that is also a felony.
Seriously, I've worn glasses since I was 9 years old and I can't remember one incident where it's ever been acceptable for someone to take the glasses off my face without my authorization. Perhaps they just didn't do it when I was overseas because I was in the military and they didn't want me shooting a cruise missile at them? Or perhaps, it's not acceptable anywhere to grab someone's glasses from off there face, except of course in McDonald's at a certain location in Paris.
As posted in another message here, this isn't the first incident at this particular McDonald's either.
What are you saying then? Are you saying that you are decrypting and taking small parts of the original video and making a new production with commentary discussing those snipets? No, I think you are saying that you are copying the movie to watch, that is illegal! Read the first paragragh "short portion.. into new works"
I'm not going to even comment on who the stupid one is, I don't need to set up a ad-homenim (sp?) attack although it seems others do. If someone is an idiot, it generally isn't in my best interest to tell them so.
It doesn't matter that css is an open book that a child with brain damage could crack, not that it is, 40 bit encryption is effective unless someone wants to look. The fact of the matter is that if you did not receive authorization from the person/company that encrypted the information in the first place to decrypt it, they you are circumventing a protection device. Thus, decrypting any movie no matter if it is protected by css or quasi-fractal imaging or what have you, is illegal unless you were granted authority to do so. Media players have gotten that information, but no you as a user. So I suppose you could video tape the screen while playing the movie in whatever windows uses to play video, however, using a program to directly decrypt the digital files themselves is illegal, with a few exceptions provided by the library of congress.
The thing is that the DMCA made copyright into a criminal offense in addition to a civil issue, so now the media companies can use the tax-payer dollars to go after people rather than their own money. This makes a lot of sense to them, but the media companies don't want to have people in jail, they want people just to pay up when threatened and to scare other people away. Even so, it doesn't matter, decrypting and encoded information without the explicit authorization of the original encryptor is illegal. How easy or hard it is to crack the encryption doesn't matter.
You are not legally allows to break the protection. From the statute.
1201. Circumvention of copyright protection systems2
(a) Violations Regarding Circumvention of Technological Measures. — (1)(A) No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title. The prohibition contained in the preceding sentence shall take effect at the end of the 2-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this chapter.
Congress gave the library of congress the authority to establish exceptions. No where in there is there and exception for someone to legally break protection just because the "own" the media. It is ILLEGAL. Saying "lots of judges say" is complete BS, I could very well say "EVERYONE IN THE WORLD THINKS YOU ARE A" probably wouldn't be true, but still. Provide documentation, show me the court ruling where the judge gave rights not listed in the law.
I checked with McDonald’s and it said an investigation was underway. But today, you received a reply from McDonald’s France that said your version couldn’t be substantiated. Interviews with employees and a client suggest you had nothing more than a polite disagreement with the employee.
And then a few paragraphs later.
But she also said the confrontation shouldn’t have happened, and that a manager at the restaurant “had a conversation with the employee in which he emphasized that crew members are to remain calm and professional at all times, in all circumstances.”
Which strikes me as odd, if it was a polite disagreement why did the manager have to have a conversation with the employee?
I don't know the specifics about why this guy has a camera attached to his head, but it's a part of his day to day life and has medical documentation confirming that the device is attached to his head. I don't know what else the documentation says, but this is enough. Now, if the store in question didn't like it they should have asked him to leave, not tried to physical remove said item. Personally, I'd call the damage an assault and would press criminal charges.
Now, granted he may have wanted this device implanted for nothing more than his own amusement, no reason for physical assault by employees. Let's change the specs a bit based on a report I saw posted the other day on slashdot. What if the person assaulted was blind and the camera was used to generate a visual image that was sent directly to the optic nerve? What would it look like? Who's to say it wouldn't look just like this? So a blind guy goes into McDonald's using his augmented visual device where the employees destroy his device and throw him out of the resteraunt. No being this guy is from a foreign country and doesn't have a cell phone hooked into the local grid he's blind and on the side of the road asking for someone to locate some help for him. Next, since his glasses are now broken and are expensive 60K I believe to replace he no will spend months without vision while he files insurance paperwork to have the glasses replaced.
So your opinion is/would be, well he shouldn't have gone on private property knowing that someone might attack him? Maybe he shouldn't leave his house? Obviously this guy traveling to a foreign country is just a big loser, he should have stayed at home in order to protect himself. Yep, if that rape victim wasn't at the bar she wouldn't have been raped, it's all her fault.
It just seems to me that the article under question wasn't trying to point out that people should use the Metacritic score with some reservation, instead it seems like it was just an attack on metacritic itself complaining that it has too much influence. If the article would have approached it in a different matter, e.g. because of people's blind belief in metacritic producers of software are more interested in a high metacritic score than about the product itself, but here are reasons the Metacritic score should not be completely relied upon... Something to that effect would have been more useful than just attacking Metacritic. As it stands, it comes across as a case of spoiled grapes where the author is jealous of Metacritic popularity.
As far as gaming the system, since Metacritic takes scores from a number of different sources, in order to game the system publishers would need to corrupt multiple sources. We know for a fact that certain magazines give favorable game reviews based on advertising dollars, i.e. I've seen it in the past and have no reason to think that it's not the case currently. The point though is that in general these reviews are not going to give negative reviews just because advertising is not there. So we can assume that a good game will get a decent score as well as the poor game with large advertising budget. The point though is that the publisher probably doesn't have enough money to bribe everyone and furthermore some reviewers/publications actually have ethics. So granting this, the good game will still get good scores at the other publications, but the bad games will receive a lower score which will lower the high score that that bribed publication gave.
I don't know how metacritic culls their reviewers but off the top of my head it seems to be a workable system.
Basically, the article is just some nameless joe/jane bitching about a successful product and seems more like jealousy than anything else. Even if there are errors in the system, the system is still better than just relying on a single review source and provides some value. The editorial author seems to be advocating that all information from metacritic should be ignored which seems a bit onesided. Therefore, I conclude it's just an attack with no logical basis and as such is fluff which provides no value and isn't significant enough to be posted here, but what are you going to do?
Metacritic a scoring system that works for a lot of people and seems to work for them isn't perfect? News at 11. Really? So someone writes an opinion piece on it backed with opinion and this is interesting? The methods Metacritic use seem to be fair and work, so who cares that someone doesn't think they are perfect?
I'll use the numbers as a guideline, but not as fact. Just like wikipedia, it's a place to start. Now if the article was aimed at pointing out that the publishers put too much emphasis on the metacritic score, then there should have been more documentation from that side of things. As it is, it's just someone standing back and saying this system sucks and suggesting that it needs to be scraped without offering any constructive advice on how to fix it. Just like people that complain about the government, but does that mean we should have no government and live in anarchy? Or perhaps wouldn't it serve customers better to try and figure out how to fix metacritics problems rather than just complaining that metacritic has too much power because people find it useful?
Yep, I still want to be using Ghz machines for linux when the rest of the computing world has moved on to PetaHz. Plenty of old equipment still around, until it breaks or needs replacement. What then? Buy back all the junk machines we threw into china landfills?
Neither article that you listed says that is legal to break the copy protection for the typical user. The Neowin site lists 4 exceptions, none of which seem to apply to copying media unless you are a teacher. The other exemptions are to locate security flaws, jailbreak a phone to go to another service provider or bypass the need for a dongle. None of which seems to apply. The usnews report specifically says that it illegal to break the encryption protecting dvd's and blueray although cdroms without security are legal to copy.
Do you have any other references? While we are entitled to copy a dvd with fair use, you have to copy it encrypted. Only legally authorized software/hardware is allowed to decrypt it under the DMCA.
Not sure exactly where it is, but don't some of the foundries up in Mass have milling tables that are over a hundred years old and within atoms flat? Although the AC probably was referring to a modern machine shop, but planing a surface is old technology and compared to modern facilities actually high precision than most of the stuff we build today. Perhaps mass produced stuff today is a lot more precise, but a one of a kind, individually crafted item can be done without fancy equipment.
Nah, by paying them minimum wage and keeping them from being able to look for better work it's as good as paying them nothing so you get to have the best of both worlds. They have no money, no time to themselves and you get to enjoy it upfront and personal. Now, if only we could get automatic tasers for them in cause they get uppity so there is no danger of them actually doing something about their situation.
Brief note of course is that you cannot do an exhaustive search on numbers since by definition they are infinite. This is no finite set therefore could not be exhaustively searched, why would anyone think it could is beyond me.
There are thousands of languages out there and your asking which one you should learn? Without information as to what type of programming you want to do or why you want to learn, it's a total crap shoot. If you just want to learn a language easily, python is a good starting language. If you want to do "real" programming than C/C++ is probably the best way to go. If you want to just do programming for entertainment, pick a project off sourceforge or github and use whatever language it uses. If you want a programming language that focuses on computer control Perl is always nice. If you want to design device drivers assembly is fun.
Really without a clue as to what kind of programming you want to do, your basically posting to a car enthusiast's site asking what kind of car to buy. Without a list of requirements you can get anything from a yugo to a hummer to dump truck.
So it's acceptable for people to lie if they are important? I suppose paying a small fine for doing unethical actions purify the actions somehow. Society seems to accept this and society is always correct so those that don't agree are big dodo heads and totally unreasonable.
How are you going to make the penalties really severe? Isn't the current standard that they get punished by serving in office and making the laws? Why would they want to make a law that would harm themselves?
I guess that means Microsoft media center will no longer take control away from the programs that I actually want to use rather than the microsoft crap. heh...
Slashdot Mirror
Or perhaps he just wrote that comment because he was trolling since his original message wasn't moded down as far as I can tell. He appears to be just trying to stir up controversy.
Like I said, I don't know the specifics, but as far as glasses go, you take my glasses you are coming in contact with me. Even if I don't start spouting blood out of numerous wounds, it's assault, perhaps even theft. Since the glasses he was/is wearing are probably worth over a grand, I believe that is also a felony.
Seriously, I've worn glasses since I was 9 years old and I can't remember one incident where it's ever been acceptable for someone to take the glasses off my face without my authorization. Perhaps they just didn't do it when I was overseas because I was in the military and they didn't want me shooting a cruise missile at them? Or perhaps, it's not acceptable anywhere to grab someone's glasses from off there face, except of course in McDonald's at a certain location in Paris.
As posted in another message here, this isn't the first incident at this particular McDonald's either.
What are you saying then? Are you saying that you are decrypting and taking small parts of the original video and making a new production with commentary discussing those snipets? No, I think you are saying that you are copying the movie to watch, that is illegal! Read the first paragragh "short portion .. into new works"
I'm not going to even comment on who the stupid one is, I don't need to set up a ad-homenim (sp?) attack although it seems others do. If someone is an idiot, it generally isn't in my best interest to tell them so.
It doesn't matter that css is an open book that a child with brain damage could crack, not that it is, 40 bit encryption is effective unless someone wants to look. The fact of the matter is that if you did not receive authorization from the person/company that encrypted the information in the first place to decrypt it, they you are circumventing a protection device. Thus, decrypting any movie no matter if it is protected by css or quasi-fractal imaging or what have you, is illegal unless you were granted authority to do so. Media players have gotten that information, but no you as a user. So I suppose you could video tape the screen while playing the movie in whatever windows uses to play video, however, using a program to directly decrypt the digital files themselves is illegal, with a few exceptions provided by the library of congress.
The thing is that the DMCA made copyright into a criminal offense in addition to a civil issue, so now the media companies can use the tax-payer dollars to go after people rather than their own money. This makes a lot of sense to them, but the media companies don't want to have people in jail, they want people just to pay up when threatened and to scare other people away. Even so, it doesn't matter, decrypting and encoded information without the explicit authorization of the original encryptor is illegal. How easy or hard it is to crack the encryption doesn't matter.
You are not legally allows to break the protection. From the statute.
1201. Circumvention of copyright protection systems2
(a) Violations Regarding Circumvention of Technological Measures. — (1)(A) No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title. The prohibition contained in the preceding sentence shall take effect at the end of the 2-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this chapter.
Congress gave the library of congress the authority to establish exceptions. No where in there is there and exception for someone to legally break protection just because the "own" the media. It is ILLEGAL. Saying "lots of judges say" is complete BS, I could very well say "EVERYONE IN THE WORLD THINKS YOU ARE A" probably wouldn't be true, but still. Provide documentation, show me the court ruling where the judge gave rights not listed in the law.
And what is clear exactly? And who owns it?
Hmmm,
Modded as funny, but I might consider moving to Kansas City based on this.
I love this response from McD's from the article.
I checked with McDonald’s and it said an investigation was underway. But today, you received a reply from McDonald’s France that said your version couldn’t be substantiated. Interviews with employees and a client suggest you had nothing more than a polite disagreement with the employee.
And then a few paragraphs later.
But she also said the confrontation shouldn’t have happened, and that a manager at the restaurant “had a conversation with the employee in which he emphasized that crew members are to remain calm and professional at all times, in all circumstances.”
Which strikes me as odd, if it was a polite disagreement why did the manager have to have a conversation with the employee?
I don't know the specifics about why this guy has a camera attached to his head, but it's a part of his day to day life and has medical documentation confirming that the device is attached to his head. I don't know what else the documentation says, but this is enough. Now, if the store in question didn't like it they should have asked him to leave, not tried to physical remove said item. Personally, I'd call the damage an assault and would press criminal charges.
Now, granted he may have wanted this device implanted for nothing more than his own amusement, no reason for physical assault by employees. Let's change the specs a bit based on a report I saw posted the other day on slashdot. What if the person assaulted was blind and the camera was used to generate a visual image that was sent directly to the optic nerve? What would it look like? Who's to say it wouldn't look just like this? So a blind guy goes into McDonald's using his augmented visual device where the employees destroy his device and throw him out of the resteraunt. No being this guy is from a foreign country and doesn't have a cell phone hooked into the local grid he's blind and on the side of the road asking for someone to locate some help for him. Next, since his glasses are now broken and are expensive 60K I believe to replace he no will spend months without vision while he files insurance paperwork to have the glasses replaced.
So your opinion is/would be, well he shouldn't have gone on private property knowing that someone might attack him? Maybe he shouldn't leave his house? Obviously this guy traveling to a foreign country is just a big loser, he should have stayed at home in order to protect himself. Yep, if that rape victim wasn't at the bar she wouldn't have been raped, it's all her fault.
Thanks for playing.
It just seems to me that the article under question wasn't trying to point out that people should use the Metacritic score with some reservation, instead it seems like it was just an attack on metacritic itself complaining that it has too much influence. If the article would have approached it in a different matter, e.g. because of people's blind belief in metacritic producers of software are more interested in a high metacritic score than about the product itself, but here are reasons the Metacritic score should not be completely relied upon... Something to that effect would have been more useful than just attacking Metacritic. As it stands, it comes across as a case of spoiled grapes where the author is jealous of Metacritic popularity.
As far as gaming the system, since Metacritic takes scores from a number of different sources, in order to game the system publishers would need to corrupt multiple sources. We know for a fact that certain magazines give favorable game reviews based on advertising dollars, i.e. I've seen it in the past and have no reason to think that it's not the case currently. The point though is that in general these reviews are not going to give negative reviews just because advertising is not there. So we can assume that a good game will get a decent score as well as the poor game with large advertising budget. The point though is that the publisher probably doesn't have enough money to bribe everyone and furthermore some reviewers/publications actually have ethics. So granting this, the good game will still get good scores at the other publications, but the bad games will receive a lower score which will lower the high score that that bribed publication gave.
I don't know how metacritic culls their reviewers but off the top of my head it seems to be a workable system.
Basically, the article is just some nameless joe/jane bitching about a successful product and seems more like jealousy than anything else. Even if there are errors in the system, the system is still better than just relying on a single review source and provides some value. The editorial author seems to be advocating that all information from metacritic should be ignored which seems a bit onesided. Therefore, I conclude it's just an attack with no logical basis and as such is fluff which provides no value and isn't significant enough to be posted here, but what are you going to do?
Metacritic a scoring system that works for a lot of people and seems to work for them isn't perfect? News at 11. Really? So someone writes an opinion piece on it backed with opinion and this is interesting? The methods Metacritic use seem to be fair and work, so who cares that someone doesn't think they are perfect?
I'll use the numbers as a guideline, but not as fact. Just like wikipedia, it's a place to start. Now if the article was aimed at pointing out that the publishers put too much emphasis on the metacritic score, then there should have been more documentation from that side of things. As it is, it's just someone standing back and saying this system sucks and suggesting that it needs to be scraped without offering any constructive advice on how to fix it. Just like people that complain about the government, but does that mean we should have no government and live in anarchy? Or perhaps wouldn't it serve customers better to try and figure out how to fix metacritics problems rather than just complaining that metacritic has too much power because people find it useful?
Yep, I still want to be using Ghz machines for linux when the rest of the computing world has moved on to PetaHz. Plenty of old equipment still around, until it breaks or needs replacement. What then? Buy back all the junk machines we threw into china landfills?
Neither article that you listed says that is legal to break the copy protection for the typical user. The Neowin site lists 4 exceptions, none of which seem to apply to copying media unless you are a teacher. The other exemptions are to locate security flaws, jailbreak a phone to go to another service provider or bypass the need for a dongle. None of which seems to apply. The usnews report specifically says that it illegal to break the encryption protecting dvd's and blueray although cdroms without security are legal to copy.
Do you have any other references? While we are entitled to copy a dvd with fair use, you have to copy it encrypted. Only legally authorized software/hardware is allowed to decrypt it under the DMCA.
Not sure exactly where it is, but don't some of the foundries up in Mass have milling tables that are over a hundred years old and within atoms flat? Although the AC probably was referring to a modern machine shop, but planing a surface is old technology and compared to modern facilities actually high precision than most of the stuff we build today. Perhaps mass produced stuff today is a lot more precise, but a one of a kind, individually crafted item can be done without fancy equipment.
Nah, by paying them minimum wage and keeping them from being able to look for better work it's as good as paying them nothing so you get to have the best of both worlds. They have no money, no time to themselves and you get to enjoy it upfront and personal. Now, if only we could get automatic tasers for them in cause they get uppity so there is no danger of them actually doing something about their situation.
Overclocking humans is fairly easy. How many programmers do you see that don't have a mountain dew on their desk?
I seldom purchase from Fry's myself, but anytime I've had a return it has always been taken care of quickly and without issue.
I've pretty much decided to vote for the lesser evil this year. Pretty sad to think that Cthulhu is the lesser evil when compared to Mickey Mouse.
Brief note of course is that you cannot do an exhaustive search on numbers since by definition they are infinite. This is no finite set therefore could not be exhaustively searched, why would anyone think it could is beyond me.
There are thousands of languages out there and your asking which one you should learn? Without information as to what type of programming you want to do or why you want to learn, it's a total crap shoot. If you just want to learn a language easily, python is a good starting language. If you want to do "real" programming than C/C++ is probably the best way to go. If you want to just do programming for entertainment, pick a project off sourceforge or github and use whatever language it uses. If you want a programming language that focuses on computer control Perl is always nice. If you want to design device drivers assembly is fun.
Really without a clue as to what kind of programming you want to do, your basically posting to a car enthusiast's site asking what kind of car to buy. Without a list of requirements you can get anything from a yugo to a hummer to dump truck.
So it's acceptable for people to lie if they are important? I suppose paying a small fine for doing unethical actions purify the actions somehow. Society seems to accept this and society is always correct so those that don't agree are big dodo heads and totally unreasonable.
+1
How are you going to make the penalties really severe? Isn't the current standard that they get punished by serving in office and making the laws? Why would they want to make a law that would harm themselves?
Seemed like a decent video compared to most home stuff. I'd like to know what tools were used to produce it.
I guess that means Microsoft media center will no longer take control away from the programs that I actually want to use rather than the microsoft crap. heh...