In any novel worth its salt the main character develops as the story unfolds, mainly due to the interaction between the story told and himself. At no point however he "levels up". The changes are subtle, gradual and, more importantly, internal.
As long as we pretend we can measure "character development" in terms of XP, levels, stats and skill points we ill always end up with a mediocre Diablo clone (that was in turn a rogue clone).
The license states it must be "the preferred method of making modifications" to the program. If it cannot be made to compile, something tells me it can't be the "preferred method".
The use of a proprietary toolchain is tricky. Plenty of GPL win32 software relies of Visual Studio, and that is fine. However, creating custom proprietary tools that serve little purpose but to circumvent the GPL, well, it sounds to me like it could fall under the anti-circumvention provisions of the DMCA. Hmmm. I am sure Hollings never thought of that...
If they had used "an academically based OS" such as *-BSD, they would be on very solid ground legally. The BSD license explicitly allows this use of the licensed software, although it disclaims liability (using that big block of caps we all love so much).
The GPL license however has been concocted to prove a point, politically. It does not say "here, do with it as you please". It says "I'll show you mine if you show me yours". Quid pro quo. Linksys has taken the quid, now they need to give us the quo.
Suppose there is an algorithm to obtain two primes from their multiplied form (not patentable). Now suppose someone found code that could do that x times faster. I guess that would be patentable under these terms.
What you are suggesting is either a different algorithm (I presume that it would have a different "big O", therefore a different "recipe", therefore a different algorith) or a specific optimized implementation of the same algorithm. The latter may or may not be patentable, I have not studied the full text of the directive. However, look at the text:
the use of an algorithm might be patentable provided that the method is used to solve a technical problem.
This implies that while "algorithm to obtain two primes from their multiplied form" would not merit a patent, "Method to decrypt ciphered content" that uses the same algorithm would, effectively precluding its use in its main application area. My thesis is that allowing this kind of protection is but a short step from allowing patentability of the algorithm as a whole, since alternative applications for most alorithms are few and far between.
First of all, MS has enough inertia(not to mention cash) to keep coasting along on their installed user base for decades.
Then you must remember that this actually allows software patents in the EU, they are forbidden right now. This plays in MS's hand, though less so than the system that is in place in the US. Also the DMCA-like EUCD is moving in the same direction.
But the most important thing is that, in order to curtail predatory business practices one must prosecute effectively, because failure to do so renders the entire legal framework a waste of paper. I love the EU with all my heart, but sometimes wasting paper is all they seem to be good at.
(13c) Furthermore, an algorithm is inherently non-technical and therefore cannot constitute a technical invention. Nonetheless, a method involving the use of an algorithm might be patentable provided that the method is used to solve a technical problem. However, any patent granted for such a method would not monopolise the algorithm itself or its use in contexts not foreseen in the patent.
On the surface it seems this amendment would stop patenting general purpose algorithms. On the other hand, a suitably lax definition of "technical problem" makes this all moot. "The LZW arithmetic coding algorithm" is not patentable. "Using the LZW algorithm for data comression" however is. You are still free to use it for other things (like what? Creative Garbling?), but we all the the Phyrricity of that victory.
Interesting, but that is so far outside the problem domain that it's not even funny.
Bind should just return NXDOMAIN and the application (Mozilla, IE, BitchX, whatever) can then sort it out in this fashion. Hell, we can even make handy BSD-licensed shared libraries that do this for easy integration.
The matter is that the application must be informed when a domain does not exist, not spammed with guesses that may be right.
There are quite a number of persistent NWN servers that are quite fullfeatured and professionally maintained, with a lot of interesting poeple to play with.
Considering the fact that any DnD nerd worth his salt already bought the game and played the original campaign, it's a great way to avoid pay-per-play while having a great online experience.
You might have to switch a few servers before you find one that suits your style though.
Ah, that would be the "rusty key". Make sure not to stand under the chandelier when it falls though. It's one of the other few ways to truly "die" in this game.
The acquisition of Ximian was an all-cash transaction and is not expected to have a material effect on Novell's financial statements in the current fiscal year. No further details as to the specific terms of the transaction are being disclosed.
Does not sound to me like Miguel will be rolling in cash though...
You obviously didn't read the story or failed to picture this properly. It requires a huge chunck of memory. Furthermore, the data in it's dictionary has to come from some where. Very doubtful you'll be able to sneak several gig worth of data onto a machine, and load it into memory, for it to be used as a remote exploit.
Sorry to interrupt your tirade here... there's no need to get the tables onto the target machine and run the cracker remotely, you just have to sneak the password hash back onto your local machine and run it locally. Did you even bother to click on the first link? It would have been amazingly obvious.
Any encryption can still be broken through though brute force.
And any literary work can be obtained with an infinite number of monkeys sitting at an infinite number of typewriters for an infinitely long period of time.
Most serious ciphers attacked using brute force with contemporary technology will probably hold out until the universe's heat death. Not to mention the fact that some experts claim that there simply is not enough energy in the universe to cycle a 128 bit counter through all its states, let alone perform any computations.
Is the extra hassle involved with deploying a completely separate network (digging?) justified in terms of increased security when compared to simply setting up a secure tunnel over an existing long distance link?
These people employ some of the best mathematicians and engineers in the world, they ought to be able to come up with a good implementation.
Not to mention the fact that even a separate link is going to require some informataion-level security as you don't want every tech with a current probe to be able see your network traffic...
The premise is that people will feel "special" due to the trust placed on them, and the "honour" of dealing directly with the dev team, that they will be less likely to give stuff away.
That said, I would never start large scale piracy of software I've purchased (such as by placing it on a p2p network or similar), but iI have considerably laxer standards about sharing it with my friends for a single shot multiplayer game.
It sounds like an extension of Alpha Centauri's "Pact of Submission". That worked rather well, though you really had to virtually exterminate a player before they'd offer one.
If the algorithm to determine when to offer such a pact is more sophisticated, it might just work as advertised.
First of all, if the cable is built out of carbon nanotubes, it's going to be a tall, but not a very wide target.
Secondly, if they anchor it somewhere in the middle of the ocean (as most people seem to suggest) it is going to be quite easy to enforce some exclusion zone. Sea is comparatively flat and easy to patrol, both with actual ships and via radar and satellite imagery. There is always the possibility of terrorist organizations with submarines, although probably a few active sonar buoys would help.
Lastly, at 36.000 km hitting the terminus with just about anything requires rather sophisticated technology, akin to ICBMs. We'd be in a whole lot of trouble in that case, and the terminus makes a comparatively poor target for this kind of capability.
Not to play the contrarian here, but the terrorist threat to such a structure is, in my opinion, being vastly overstated in this discussion.
Slashdot Mirror
As long as we pretend we can measure "character development" in terms of XP, levels, stats and skill points we ill always end up with a mediocre Diablo clone (that was in turn a rogue clone).
The use of a proprietary toolchain is tricky. Plenty of GPL win32 software relies of Visual Studio, and that is fine. However, creating custom proprietary tools that serve little purpose but to circumvent the GPL, well, it sounds to me like it could fall under the anti-circumvention provisions of the DMCA. Hmmm. I am sure Hollings never thought of that ...
The GPL license however has been concocted to prove a point, politically. It does not say "here, do with it as you please". It says "I'll show you mine if you show me yours". Quid pro quo. Linksys has taken the quid, now they need to give us the quo.
I believe he is claiming Rijndael is a group. I don't have any data on that, but I find that quite hard to believe.
What you are suggesting is either a different algorithm (I presume that it would have a different "big O", therefore a different "recipe", therefore a different algorith) or a specific optimized implementation of the same algorithm. The latter may or may not be patentable, I have not studied the full text of the directive. However, look at the text:
This implies that while "algorithm to obtain two primes from their multiplied form" would not merit a patent, "Method to decrypt ciphered content" that uses the same algorithm would, effectively precluding its use in its main application area. My thesis is that allowing this kind of protection is but a short step from allowing patentability of the algorithm as a whole, since alternative applications for most alorithms are few and far between.But the most important thing is that, in order to curtail predatory business practices one must prosecute effectively, because failure to do so renders the entire legal framework a waste of paper. I love the EU with all my heart, but sometimes wasting paper is all they seem to be good at.
Bind should just return NXDOMAIN and the application (Mozilla, IE, BitchX, whatever) can then sort it out in this fashion. Hell, we can even make handy BSD-licensed shared libraries that do this for easy integration.
The matter is that the application must be informed when a domain does not exist, not spammed with guesses that may be right.
Considering the fact that any DnD nerd worth his salt already bought the game and played the original campaign, it's a great way to avoid pay-per-play while having a great online experience.
You might have to switch a few servers before you find one that suits your style though.
Ah, that would be the "rusty key".
Make sure not to stand under the chandelier when it falls though. It's one of the other few ways to truly "die" in this game.
It's quite neat really.
Does not sound to me like Miguel will be rolling in cash though ...
Sorry to interrupt your tirade here ... there's no need to get the tables onto the target machine and run the cracker remotely, you just have to sneak the password hash back onto your local machine and run it locally. Did you even bother to click on the first link? It would have been amazingly obvious.
Yo man ... feel the algo-rythm!
t's not hs fault that hs kyboard s brokn.
No, they are not popular in the EU.
Besides, if i remember correctly, they were planning to use RFID in the "Sisley" subbrand.
We're waiting, pansy.
I guess there will always be people that set up the holodeck to simulate a 1996 PC to play Masters of Magic.
And any literary work can be obtained with an infinite number of monkeys sitting at an infinite number of typewriters for an infinitely long period of time.
Most serious ciphers attacked using brute force with contemporary technology will probably hold out until the universe's heat death. Not to mention the fact that some experts claim that there simply is not enough energy in the universe to cycle a 128 bit counter through all its states, let alone perform any computations.
Shashdotted already. Could someone that still has the page open please whore a bit?
Thanks.
These people employ some of the best mathematicians and engineers in the world, they ought to be able to come up with a good implementation.
Not to mention the fact that even a separate link is going to require some informataion-level security as you don't want every tech with a current probe to be able see your network traffic ...
That said, I would never start large scale piracy of software I've purchased (such as by placing it on a p2p network or similar), but iI have considerably laxer standards about sharing it with my friends for a single shot multiplayer game.
It sounds like an extension of Alpha Centauri's "Pact of Submission". That worked rather well, though you really had to virtually exterminate a player before they'd offer one.
If the algorithm to determine when to offer such a pact is more sophisticated, it might just work as advertised.
Secondly, if they anchor it somewhere in the middle of the ocean (as most people seem to suggest) it is going to be quite easy to enforce some exclusion zone. Sea is comparatively flat and easy to patrol, both with actual ships and via radar and satellite imagery. There is always the possibility of terrorist organizations with submarines, although probably a few active sonar buoys would help.
Lastly, at 36.000 km hitting the terminus with just about anything requires rather sophisticated technology, akin to ICBMs. We'd be in a whole lot of trouble in that case, and the terminus makes a comparatively poor target for this kind of capability.
Not to play the contrarian here, but the terrorist threat to such a structure is, in my opinion, being vastly overstated in this discussion.
Being ethical and following orders aren't necessarily the same thing.