The idea is to introduce a new protection scheme and hardware that will read it the new protection, but to let old hardware work without that protection. "You can't do that to consumers -- you've got to have to have backwards-compatibility. That's why this is not an easy solution," he says.
Um...so all we have to do is keep one DVD player around from the pre-compulsory-watermarking days (ie, now) and use it to rip all future DVDs into DivX;-) or Vorbis or whatever format is popular at the time? Doesn't sound like a very useful copy-protection scheme...
From RFC2821: It consolidates, updates
and clarifies, but doesn't add new or change existing functionality
of the following:
- the original SMTP (Simple Mail Transfer Protocol) specification of
RFC 821 [30],
- domain name system requirements and implications for mail
transport from RFC 1035 [22] and RFC 974 [27],
- the clarifications and applicability statements in RFC 1123 [2],
and
- material drawn from the SMTP Extension mechanisms [19].
It obsoletes RFC 821, RFC 974, and updates RFC 1123 (replaces the
mail transport materials of RFC 1123). However, RFC 821 specifies
some features that were not in significant use in the Internet by the
mid-1990s and (in appendices) some additional transport models.
Those sections are omitted here in the interest of clarity and
brevity; readers needing them should refer to RFC 821.
Re:Sunday Supplement Projects
on
First Arcology?
·
· Score: 1
Here's quite a good site for all things mega-construction related: Mega-Scale Engineering.
(Of course, bear in mind that the only gesture based interface I've used is Strokes, in GNU Emacs.)
How exactly is waving the mouse around easier than hitting a a control-key combo, for instance? Is it quicker for me to click and drag my mouse (while violating twenty-odd years of WIMP standards...) than to quickly tap ALT-LeftArrow? Doesn't there seem to be a huge margin of error. Imagine assigning "delete-this-file-irretreivebly" (in Konqy, for instance) to click-drag-up, while having click-drag-up mean "move-up-directory". All it would take is for a little bump while moving your mouse.
This just sounds like a silly little gimmick.
Except, I guess, if you have a motor problem, then maybe the impreciseness of this technique could be an advantage.
As far as I can tell from the site, G-Force does not provide support for XMMS *at all*. In fact, it does not even run under Linux at all, only under Windows and Mac.
I'm sure it's just that you needed to pad out the story there, but at least make up something that doesn't directly contradict something that's on the guys' site.
here
Or you could use the classic slashdot2000/slashdot2000 username/password pair
On an OT note, how long do you think it will be before NYT catch on to this and eliminate it?
Both the BSD license and the GPL use copyright law to enforce freedom on software, but it's two different types of freedom.
The BSD license basically says that you can do anything you like with the code, except claim that you wrote it. This includes using the code in closed software project, and this is how Microsoft managed to get a decent TCP/IP stack on windows: they took it from BSD. Under the BSD license, this is completely fine, as long as it is acknowledged.
The GPL, on the other hand, says that you can use and modify the source however you like, and redistribute it to whoever you want, as long as you give these same rights to them.
I guess the gist of it is that the BSD license is designed to give absolute personal freedom to you, while the GPL is designed to give (and to make sure you can't worm your way out of) that freedom to the 'community'.
Many people also use assembly because it is also great for people who want to not only code a program, but actually know how it works. you can write a program in C you say? Or PERL, Eiffel, or whatever? I consider using function calls cheating in a way. Did you write any of those standard C functions that you are using?
If not, did you really write that program, or did you simply arrange the smaller programs of others (functions) in such a way that they work differently than the particular arrangement of another person's program.
In a way, assembly is also just rearranging "smaller programs of others" into larger programs. How? On x86 (and other CISC-style architectures) assembly is not the lowest level of programming, microcode is. It's just like using functions in C, except that you're functions are written in extremely low level microcode rather than another HLL.
Konqueror supports SSL, JavaScript (aka EcmaScript), Java, Netscape Plugins, HTML4, CSS, etc...
While the version that was released with KDE2 and KDE2.0.1 was a bit unstable and had broken rendering (particularily on tables), the latest CVS version is much, much more stable and seems to support everything just fine.
By the way, contrary to popular belief, you don't have to run the full KDE2 desktop environment for it to work, but you do need QT and the KDE libraries installed.
I am a physician who is setting up a new adult medicine clinic with several other physicians.
If 'adult' medicine is your game, then perhaps computers with internet connections in the waiting room could be your solution, since we all know that 9/10 of search results for anything will lead to links to sites likethis!
[In case you fail to fail to miss the point, like most mindless GNU drones, answer this question: How many successful protocols have their reference implementations licensed under the GPL?]
And how many are under the BSD licence?
as much as i hope you're right, i can see one way that they can still win...
all they need to do is to bring it in slowly, so that people don't notice, until it's too late. they've got all the time in the world. what do they care if it takes a generation or two for all media to be protected like this? once they win, it won't be for now, or for a little while, it'll be FOREVER. when no one remembers what it was like when you could record anything you liked out of the air, they will have won. completely and finally.
Re:Yes. This is worthy of slashdot.
on
Nano-pants
·
· Score: 1
There's another reason why this is worthy of slashdot: we're now one step closer to clothes that clean themselves, which, when combined with IV nutrients, enables nerds to do week-long coding binges without worrying about starvation OR hygiene!
The Linux enthusiast Web site Slashdot.org
for years no one believed my claims that slashdot was part of the linux conspiracy, but now ZDNet, the most reliable IT news service on earth have confirmed my suspicions!
a bit offtopic, but useful perhaps: Konqueror in CVS now has an option to disable window.open
now it's even more convenient to visit all those pr0n sites!
just like the record and movie industry, authors would like books to be pay-per-view.
you're ignoring the fundamental differences between authors and music or film production here. firstly, producing a film is expensive. it takes a whole pile of money to hire all the actors, build sets, etc, etc. even to make (and promote) a single album can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. a book however, can be written by a single person in their free time, at very little cost.
secondly, and related to the above, there is the different relationships between the content producers and the content distributors.
in movies and music, the content-producer (the director or musicians, etc) are tightly connected to the content-distributors (the record labels or production house) due to the need for large gobs of money.
most authors, on the otherhand, just write each book on their own time and sell it on its own merits once its down. this means they have less of a vested interest in purely financial returns on their work.
Slashdot Mirror
The idea is to introduce a new protection scheme and hardware that will read it the new protection, but to let old hardware work without that protection. "You can't do that to consumers -- you've got to have to have backwards-compatibility. That's why this is not an easy solution," he says.
Um...so all we have to do is keep one DVD player around from the pre-compulsory-watermarking days (ie, now) and use it to rip all future DVDs into DivX;-) or Vorbis or whatever format is popular at the time? Doesn't sound like a very useful copy-protection scheme...
From RFC2821:
It consolidates, updates and clarifies, but doesn't add new or change existing functionality of the following: - the original SMTP (Simple Mail Transfer Protocol) specification of RFC 821 [30], - domain name system requirements and implications for mail transport from RFC 1035 [22] and RFC 974 [27], - the clarifications and applicability statements in RFC 1123 [2], and - material drawn from the SMTP Extension mechanisms [19]. It obsoletes RFC 821, RFC 974, and updates RFC 1123 (replaces the mail transport materials of RFC 1123). However, RFC 821 specifies some features that were not in significant use in the Internet by the mid-1990s and (in appendices) some additional transport models. Those sections are omitted here in the interest of clarity and brevity; readers needing them should refer to RFC 821.
Here's quite a good site for all things mega-construction related: Mega-Scale Engineering.
Everything2 seems slashdotted, but I think that link should have been to here.
How exactly is waving the mouse around easier than hitting a a control-key combo, for instance? Is it quicker for me to click and drag my mouse (while violating twenty-odd years of WIMP standards...) than to quickly tap ALT-LeftArrow? Doesn't there seem to be a huge margin of error. Imagine assigning "delete-this-file-irretreivebly" (in Konqy, for instance) to click-drag-up, while having click-drag-up mean "move-up-directory". All it would take is for a little bump while moving your mouse.
This just sounds like a silly little gimmick.
Except, I guess, if you have a motor problem, then maybe the impreciseness of this technique could be an advantage.
As far as I can tell from the site, G-Force does not provide support for XMMS *at all*. In fact, it does not even run under Linux at all, only under Windows and Mac.
I'm sure it's just that you needed to pad out the story there, but at least make up something that doesn't directly contradict something that's on the guys' site.
here
Or you could use the classic slashdot2000/slashdot2000 username/password pair
On an OT note, how long do you think it will be before NYT catch on to this and eliminate it?
The BSD license basically says that you can do anything you like with the code, except claim that you wrote it. This includes using the code in closed software project, and this is how Microsoft managed to get a decent TCP/IP stack on windows: they took it from BSD. Under the BSD license, this is completely fine, as long as it is acknowledged.
The GPL, on the other hand, says that you can use and modify the source however you like, and redistribute it to whoever you want, as long as you give these same rights to them.
I guess the gist of it is that the BSD license is designed to give absolute personal freedom to you, while the GPL is designed to give (and to make sure you can't worm your way out of) that freedom to the 'community'.
In a way, assembly is also just rearranging "smaller programs of others" into larger programs. How? On x86 (and other CISC-style architectures) assembly is not the lowest level of programming, microcode is. It's just like using functions in C, except that you're functions are written in extremely low level microcode rather than another HLL.
the reg-free link is here
Konqueror supports SSL, JavaScript (aka EcmaScript), Java, Netscape Plugins, HTML4, CSS, etc...
While the version that was released with KDE2 and KDE2.0.1 was a bit unstable and had broken rendering (particularily on tables), the latest CVS version is much, much more stable and seems to support everything just fine.
By the way, contrary to popular belief, you don't have to run the full KDE2 desktop environment for it to work, but you do need QT and the KDE libraries installed.
I am a physician who is setting up a new adult medicine clinic with several other physicians.
If 'adult' medicine is your game, then perhaps computers with internet connections in the waiting room could be your solution, since we all know that 9/10 of search results for anything will lead to links to sites like this!
[In case you fail to fail to miss the point, like most mindless GNU drones, answer this question: How many successful protocols have their reference implementations licensed under the GPL?]
And how many are under the BSD licence?
Do you really want to send everyone to kernel.org?
Really, it's not that hard to go to ftp..kernel.org instead is it?
as much as i hope you're right, i can see one way that they can still win...
all they need to do is to bring it in slowly, so that people don't notice, until it's too late. they've got all the time in the world. what do they care if it takes a generation or two for all media to be protected like this? once they win, it won't be for now, or for a little while, it'll be FOREVER. when no one remembers what it was like when you could record anything you liked out of the air, they will have won. completely and finally.
...moderate this story down as -1, Troll?
From a perhaps more reputable source:
New Scientist
There's another reason why this is worthy of slashdot: we're now one step closer to clothes that clean themselves, which, when combined with IV nutrients, enables nerds to do week-long coding binges without worrying about starvation OR hygiene!
go to IRC because it's somewhere that magically makes their penis extend two or three whole inches
Why do that when there's an even easier way!
The Linux enthusiast Web site Slashdot.org
for years no one believed my claims that slashdot was part of the linux conspiracy, but now ZDNet, the most reliable IT news service on earth have confirmed my suspicions!
You've got tivos in your 3y3z?
and they're getting h4x0r3d?
a bit offtopic, but useful perhaps: Konqueror in CVS now has an option to disable window.open
now it's even more convenient to visit all those pr0n sites!
IANAE, but isn't there a kernel patch that gives you a non-executable, but read-write stack?
how is this any different?
you're ignoring the fundamental differences between authors and music or film production here. firstly, producing a film is expensive. it takes a whole pile of money to hire all the actors, build sets, etc, etc. even to make (and promote) a single album can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. a book however, can be written by a single person in their free time, at very little cost.
secondly, and related to the above, there is the different relationships between the content producers and the content distributors.
in movies and music, the content-producer (the director or musicians, etc) are tightly connected to the content-distributors (the record labels or production house) due to the need for large gobs of money.
most authors, on the otherhand, just write each book on their own time and sell it on its own merits once its down. this means they have less of a vested interest in purely financial returns on their work.
I don't see how narrowing the scope makes it any less stupid.
Regardless of what it applies to, it is still a patent on an idea that is:
a) obvious to anyone with experience in the field, so it's therefore *not* novel
b) in wide use all over the internet, so it's *not* original
IANAL, but this looks like it fails both the tests for new patents