because in order to make them effective, the police and others are tempted to go on "fishing expeditions" which will mostly catch small fry, while the big, commercially oriented pirates will simply continue to operate without restriction.
The only way to defeat the commercial pirates is to make it commercially impossible for them to make a profit - but that would mean actually competing in the market place and that would be a shock to many media companies:-)
happy to. If it were technically possible and secure I'd be happy to pay 1 cent / google search as it's such a useful service. That would return a significant revenue to google for their excellent service and put off the day they are tempted to accept banner ads. Others won't want to pay, that's OK, nobody is forced to use the service.
What would be interesting would be a micropayment scheme that could work with email. That way we could price spammers out of existance:-)
One wonders why Disney would wish to retain copyright in that case. They have to protect their legal position (ie go after any pirate copies) or lose it. Far cheaper for them to just disown it and trash any copies they have.
Or do they think that one day the film will become a source of income again?
oh hum, stupid laws are unavoidable I suppose. But when it comes to enforcement I'm sure that the police and the legal system have much better things to do than bother with your average porn web site.
"Please Mr policeman I saw a dirty web page."
"Were you forced to look"
"No."
"Go away."
cheap, rugged, not affected by EMP, magnetic fields and ionizing radiation. Not destroyed by minor immersion in common household liquids. Data is permanent, margin notes can be created with burnt sticks or dark minerals wrapped in wood. Doesn't need batteries. Can be used to help start fires and be hung up in the outhouse when the e-order of e-toilet roll didn't get delivered.
someone previously suggested that the "experience" of a web page was just as important as the content.
wrong, nobody wants to "experience" a web page. An in-your-face web page is a web page that puts people off. HTML isn't an entermainment medium (though some of the source is very funny) -- it's the content that's important.
When a company stops doing new stuff (have to avoid the deadly "innovation" word now probably trademarked by M$) and tries to make money on licencing old technology (which is what this is really about - they want make a few $$$ from companies that will just pay to make the lawyers go away) they have become the company of the living dead. Existing as a zombie they will crawl the net for a few more years, but will eventually decay into nothing.
but if Bill G@es stands for office after this system is installed....
easy - self-balancing unicycle
on
What is 'IT'?
·
· Score: 1
you can either ride it as a normal unicycle - but without the problems of balance to cope with. Or use it as a bag carrier - just attach bags to the sbu and pull it along behind you with a lead. The self-balancing properties will make it follow naturally.
Easy? Power is a problem as usual but batteries are slowly improving. In 5 years time they may be good enough.
If you intend to make use of the information on a storage device (music, video etc) there has to be a point where it's presented in the clear. At this point all the copy protection in the world on the hardware has done you no good whatsoever.
Copy protection DOES NOT PREVENT LARGE SCALE PIRACY.
Linux needs a "game box" with a fixed, but virtual, environment. The game runs in the fixed environment and the box translates anything that needs translating to real world APIs. As Linux games will not be accessing native hardware interfaces (a'la Microsoft) this should not be a hugely difficult job. This could also simplify game design as you can factor out many common game services and provide them as part of the box API.
Regardless of the merits of Latex on the web, we do need a truely open page layout language. One that can be a 90% solution to decent layout on web pages, paper pages and monitor screens. Postscript and PDF aren't really open and are too complex and slow for most live uses; latex really needs multiple passes to do it's job best (and is really a document layout language anyway - displaying pgs 23 to 25 requires that the entire document be processed just for 3 pages displayed.)
Sony once has a PS-like system called NeWS for live displays but it died out; Display postscript is still around but isn't open.
As most large organisations operate in failure mode most of the time you can bet that just about any license raid conducted by MS will turnup roughly 10% of installed systems with no apparent license. It may just be that the license can't be found.
When they come back 12 months later the situation will be the same and another 10% of systems will seem to have no license. etc etc
Why bother with the difficult job of writing s/w when you can milk your customers and sell them stuff they have already paid for.
The current tivo and replay hardware is little more than standard PC components in a big box; anyone with some money and time to spare can build their own equivalent(and there are a few open projects doing that right now.)
This time next year there will be many 2nd generation commercial systems using fully integated components. The box will be little bigger than the 70Gbyte disk(s) it will contain and the h/w costs will fall dramatically.
Perhaps replay decided not to bother competing with the huge cost reductions that will occur over the next 12 to 24 months.
Who cares; it may be internal IBM politics at work
rather than any technical hitch.
The crusoe chip is important for reasons other
than power consumption. It's smaller which should
result in better yields and thus lower cost. Because it only implements a core instruction set in hardware it's a lot cheaper to re-engineer when Intel moves the goalposts - a s/w upgrade is a lot quicker than redesigning the chip.
Finally, another article here is about Intel patenting some aspects of their new CPU. Their lawyers would find it difficult to argue that a software emulation of those aspects on a different architecture was infringing the patent (which won't stop them trying of course.)
It will be interesting who MS accuses over the next few weeks.
Question one is, will MS go off on a tangent blustering about hackers and script kiddies; or will they actually LEARN a lession and take some notice of all the good security advice that is available in the net?
Q2 is "Why hasn't this happened before?" MS can't be the only windows/nt site in the world that is not attacked by script kiddies. What normally protects them; why can't we buy it?
CSS is going to die, not because of legal or technical reasons but because the suppliers of the DVD players will get sick of paying CSS license fees. Already almost every DVD player is capable of playing DVDs from every region (the cheats are trivially found on the web -- in the UK almost every player can be bought pre-hacked.) It'll be a long painful process but it will happen.
Unfortunately some people just can't learn from history. Watermarks will be defeated not by their triviallity but because the playback hardware will be designed in such a way as to provide an optional bypass around the watermark detection system. The cheats will be come public and that's the end of that game...
If it can be detected (and it must be in order for fairly simple electronics in the player/recorder to detect the signal) it's easy to defeat.
The whole point of WATERMARKS is that they are obvious to the casual observer. "Watermarked" audio or video requires that the watermark be undetectable to the casual observer. A paradox?
Sun sell PC Netlink that provides a native Unix
"Windows NT Network Services". In particular it provides file and print servers (NTFS) It is based on an AT&T product.
The story I was told was: AT&T obtained a source license from MS for NTFS. However, the MS land sharks were asleep that day and forgot to include a license clause preventing AT&T from further sub-licensing the source. AT&T promptly turned round and sub-licensed their code to Sun.
So there are copies of NTFS source floating around at least two major compeditors of MS which must make them a tad touchy on the subject:-)
There should be a special section in the Snake Oil encryption FAQ for media encryption schemes.
At some point it ends up a just music/video and can be re-encoded so what's the point?
And watermarking - to be useful it has to be distinguishable from the real data and so can be detected and rubbed out. Not by individuals of course but by those organisations that pirate media on an industrial scale who don't care about investing a few $100k
Slashdot Mirror
The only way to defeat the commercial pirates is to make it commercially impossible for them to make a profit - but that would mean actually competing in the market place and that would be a shock to many media companies :-)
A week later there will be whispers of a successful hack.
A month later instructions will be available on how to modify the drive to bypass the protection.
What would be interesting would be a micropayment scheme that could work with email. That way we could price spammers out of existance :-)
Or do they think that one day the film will become a source of income again?
"Please Mr policeman I saw a dirty web page."
"Were you forced to look"
"No."
"Go away."
cheap, rugged, not affected by EMP, magnetic fields and ionizing radiation. Not destroyed by minor immersion in common household liquids. Data is permanent, margin notes can be created with burnt sticks or dark minerals wrapped in wood. Doesn't need batteries. Can be used to help start fires and be hung up in the outhouse when the e-order of e-toilet roll didn't get delivered.
wrong, nobody wants to "experience" a web page. An in-your-face web page is a web page that puts people off. HTML isn't an entermainment medium (though some of the source is very funny) -- it's the content that's important.
When a company stops doing new stuff (have to avoid the deadly "innovation" word now probably trademarked by M$) and tries to make money on licencing old technology (which is what this is really about - they want make a few $$$ from companies that will just pay to make the lawyers go away) they have become the company of the living dead. Existing as a zombie they will crawl the net for a few more years, but will eventually decay into nothing.
If people want to be interactive they should be doing proper client/server protocols.
If they want total control over layout they may as well use DisplayPostscript and be done with it.
but if Bill G@es stands for office after this system is installed....
Easy? Power is a problem as usual but batteries are slowly improving. In 5 years time they may be good enough.
Copy protection DOES NOT PREVENT LARGE SCALE PIRACY.
Linux needs a "game box" with a fixed, but virtual, environment. The game runs in the fixed environment and the box translates anything that needs translating to real world APIs. As Linux games will not be accessing native hardware interfaces (a'la Microsoft) this should not be a hugely difficult job. This could also simplify game design as you can factor out many common game services and provide them as part of the box API.
Then there's the question of fonts...
When they come back 12 months later the situation will be the same and another 10% of systems will seem to have no license. etc etc
Why bother with the difficult job of writing s/w when you can milk your customers and sell them stuff they have already paid for.
This time next year there will be many 2nd generation commercial systems using fully integated components. The box will be little bigger than the 70Gbyte disk(s) it will contain and the h/w costs will fall dramatically.
Perhaps replay decided not to bother competing with the huge cost reductions that will occur over the next 12 to 24 months.
Do you run uncertified software? Then sorry can't help - remove the s/w and if it still happens call us again. That'll be $90, thankyou.
The crusoe chip is important for reasons other than power consumption. It's smaller which should result in better yields and thus lower cost. Because it only implements a core instruction set in hardware it's a lot cheaper to re-engineer when Intel moves the goalposts - a s/w upgrade is a lot quicker than redesigning the chip.
Finally, another article here is about Intel patenting some aspects of their new CPU. Their lawyers would find it difficult to argue that a software emulation of those aspects on a different architecture was infringing the patent (which won't stop them trying of course.)
I suppose alec-guinness-the-actor-not-the-beer-really-sucks. com
would be Ok then :-)
Question one is, will MS go off on a tangent blustering about hackers and script kiddies; or will they actually LEARN a lession and take some notice of all the good security advice that is available in the net?
Q2 is "Why hasn't this happened before?" MS can't be the only windows/nt site in the world that is not attacked by script kiddies. What normally protects them; why can't we buy it?
Unfortunately some people just can't learn from history. Watermarks will be defeated not by their triviallity but because the playback hardware will be designed in such a way as to provide an optional bypass around the watermark detection system. The cheats will be come public and that's the end of that game...
If it can be detected (and it must be in order for fairly simple electronics in the player/recorder to detect the signal) it's easy to defeat. The whole point of WATERMARKS is that they are obvious to the casual observer. "Watermarked" audio or video requires that the watermark be undetectable to the casual observer. A paradox?
Was the CD OS independent? Or was it "for Windows X.X or better?"
The story I was told was: AT&T obtained a source license from MS for NTFS. However, the MS land sharks were asleep that day and forgot to include a license clause preventing AT&T from further sub-licensing the source. AT&T promptly turned round and sub-licensed their code to Sun.
So there are copies of NTFS source floating around at least two major compeditors of MS which must make them a tad touchy on the subject :-)
At some point it ends up a just music/video and can be re-encoded so what's the point?
And watermarking - to be useful it has to be distinguishable from the real data and so can be detected and rubbed out. Not by individuals of course but by those organisations that pirate media on an industrial scale who don't care about investing a few $100k