Really, I think everyone should care about this issue. It all boils down to device ownership. Say you buy a decent prosumer camcorder with the intent of maybe shooting your own low budget film. You purchased the camera so you own the device and therefore should not have to pay any additional royalties for using it in a way you desire. Under the MPEG-LA licensing agreement, you will have to pay royalties for each copy of the film you distribute to the MPEG-LA. This could get quite expensive and, in effect, creates a legal racketeering operation. You as the filmmaker are threatened with high punitive fines making it even more costly to try your own film out. Ignorance is what allows corporations (and government, too) to get away with such actions. This is where VP8 comes into play. Imagine if you had a prosumer camcorder with the VP8 capabilities - you would not worry about creativity and artistic innovation.
It is interesting to see this sudden almost about-face by the MPEG group. It will be interesting to see if they produce something better than VP8. However, VP8 is a very reasonable replacement for H.264. I have normal vision (i.e. without glasses) and I have a hard time discerning any differences between H.264 and VP8. All things being equal, I'd sooner go with something both open source and patent unencumbered.
It has become disgustingly easy to patent something that really should not be patentable. One result of the fast and loose IP laws is an entirely new method of profit for enterprise: using the court system as a means of revenue (i.e. sue for profit.) In the end, the IP laws have become the United States undoing because how can we be technological innovators and leaders if the would-be inventor is scared off by some superfluous patent over something ridiculous.
Well, if the MPEG-LA wants to look foolish, it should continue down the path it is on. My guess is this attempt to discredit VP8 is doomed to failure. Last time I checked, Google now holds the patent portfolio associated with the VP8 codec.
Maybe if we let Huawei and ZTE in on the cell network so that China can spy on our telecommunications infrastructure, China would give us a grant - to hell with a loan.
It is nifty but completely impractical. According to the article, it needs a 250hp motor to drive a pump to deliver enough thrust to achieve some levitation. It is cool as a stunt, but unless they figure out how to cram 250hp into something small and light weight, I'd say it is showmanship.
I always thought it was a matter of economics not technology that ISPs are generally unwilling to go to IPv6. I think ISPs like IPv4 because they can charge extra for static addresses. Since IPv6 has virtually limitless addresses this kind of removes an extra profit generator. Now it would seem end users can have large address blocks and soon it might be economically feasible for uber geeks like myself to do BGP routing!
This discovery might really be ground-breaking if it can reduce the volatility of hydrogen and make it more suitable for use in traditional, internal combustion engines in cars and small trucks. I don't believe electric cars are really the answer to a cleaner environment because batteries have a finite life span and use caustic chemicals. However, I believe some scientists expressed concern over helium depletion. Here is a link about a http://www.physorg.com/news201853523.html">theory of helium depletion. Again, it is a theory so take it with a grain of sand.
It is true that OpenChange and SOGo look very promising and I am following the news with quite a bit of interest. One day it will be production ready. That said, Open Xchange is open source to a point. I think Open-Xchange is more crippleware because you have to buy the product in order to get Outlook integration, or at least the last time I looked into it.
I always wondered why the cartels haven't invested in UAVs. It must be pretty simple now days to build a GPS guided device with enough payload to make the more expensive drugs worthwhile to ship
Especially because many of these cartels have cash and valuables on hand to rival the GDP of smaller second and third world countries. Hire an engineer and use some off the shelf components. GPS is cheap now.
I see they haven't figured out our advanced potato cannon technology yet.
Funny, I wondered why they hadn't tried that. Seems it would be more efficient and quicker. Some compressed air, poof, and voila air mail delivery of the drug du jour.
With powerful technology and the constant downward pressure of the prices of technology, the barrier of entry to filmmaking is coming down. You could now, in theory, use VP8 and make an independent film without worrying about royalties.
I think the author of the article makes an astoundingly poor conclusion. In reality, America is losing its technical prowess, not due to engineers being labeled as geeks/outsiders, but because engineering jobs are being shipped overseas. Engineering jobs are being given to India, China, Singapore, Taiwan, etc. Since government has rewarded industry in terms of tax breaks for offshoring jobs and other travesties, there is little or no incentive to go through the hard work and schooling to become an engineer when there is a dearth of jobs available. America is a service economy and a service economy is essentially third world stagnation.
I see this happen all of the time. It really comes down to the fact that IT workers in the U.S. have no power and virtually little recourse of any kind. IT could benefit from unionizing but there is such a pervasive culture of fear that it would never happen. Unions can prevent petty situations like the story above by setting hard and fast contractual rules with the force of law not some arbitrary HR policy. We are treated at best as an expendable asset and at worst, an intangible liability. I am in the process of starting my own business and if and when I get big enough, I plan to start a new trend in which the "throwing under the bus" mentality will not be tolerated!
I think the whole argument is really over peanuts. I care little about the technical merits of either side. Personally, my eyes cannot distinguish between good H.264 and WebM. They both look equally as good. So one might be marginally faster or even marginally better? I would rather go for the patent unencumbered technology because I don't want to be threatened with a royalty lawsuit for maybe making some money off of a video I shot. I want to completely own the videos that I shoot. It comes down to a legal argument versus a technical one. It is all well and good if there are ISO standards surrounding H.264 but if using it brings lawsuit storm clouds overhead, no thanks! Everyone here is trying to make a technical argument when the article is looking at legal issues.
No, it's not illegal and it is very easy to do. You're talking about competition with ISPs. The article is talking about an entirely separate internet free of corporate and/or government involvement with no routing back to the original internet. Make it grass roots enough and neither government nor corporations can do anything. Literally, you use high gain wireless antennas and make it a house-to-house, building-to-building thing. At no time does any of the infrastructure cross AT&T, Sprint, Qwest, et al networks. It goes over unlicensed radio spectrum.
Slashdot Mirror
Really, I think everyone should care about this issue. It all boils down to device ownership. Say you buy a decent prosumer camcorder with the intent of maybe shooting your own low budget film. You purchased the camera so you own the device and therefore should not have to pay any additional royalties for using it in a way you desire. Under the MPEG-LA licensing agreement, you will have to pay royalties for each copy of the film you distribute to the MPEG-LA. This could get quite expensive and, in effect, creates a legal racketeering operation. You as the filmmaker are threatened with high punitive fines making it even more costly to try your own film out. Ignorance is what allows corporations (and government, too) to get away with such actions. This is where VP8 comes into play. Imagine if you had a prosumer camcorder with the VP8 capabilities - you would not worry about creativity and artistic innovation.
It is interesting to see this sudden almost about-face by the MPEG group. It will be interesting to see if they produce something better than VP8. However, VP8 is a very reasonable replacement for H.264. I have normal vision (i.e. without glasses) and I have a hard time discerning any differences between H.264 and VP8. All things being equal, I'd sooner go with something both open source and patent unencumbered.
It has become disgustingly easy to patent something that really should not be patentable. One result of the fast and loose IP laws is an entirely new method of profit for enterprise: using the court system as a means of revenue (i.e. sue for profit.) In the end, the IP laws have become the United States undoing because how can we be technological innovators and leaders if the would-be inventor is scared off by some superfluous patent over something ridiculous.
Well, if the MPEG-LA wants to look foolish, it should continue down the path it is on. My guess is this attempt to discredit VP8 is doomed to failure. Last time I checked, Google now holds the patent portfolio associated with the VP8 codec.
Maybe if we let Huawei and ZTE in on the cell network so that China can spy on our telecommunications infrastructure, China would give us a grant - to hell with a loan.
For the most part you are right. Although, depending upon the year, Russia is neck and neck with the US on most people incarcerated.
So basically Linksys cum Cisco practices evil capitalism ...... Great! Are ethics and capitalism mutually exclusive.
It is nifty but completely impractical. According to the article, it needs a 250hp motor to drive a pump to deliver enough thrust to achieve some levitation. It is cool as a stunt, but unless they figure out how to cram 250hp into something small and light weight, I'd say it is showmanship.
All you have to do is jam the cell phone frequencies and the problem is solved. Issue special cell phones to prison staff so they are unaffected.
I always thought it was a matter of economics not technology that ISPs are generally unwilling to go to IPv6. I think ISPs like IPv4 because they can charge extra for static addresses. Since IPv6 has virtually limitless addresses this kind of removes an extra profit generator. Now it would seem end users can have large address blocks and soon it might be economically feasible for uber geeks like myself to do BGP routing!
This discovery might really be ground-breaking if it can reduce the volatility of hydrogen and make it more suitable for use in traditional, internal combustion engines in cars and small trucks. I don't believe electric cars are really the answer to a cleaner environment because batteries have a finite life span and use caustic chemicals. However, I believe some scientists expressed concern over helium depletion. Here is a link about a http://www.physorg.com/news201853523.html">theory of helium depletion. Again, it is a theory so take it with a grain of sand.
This is actually a good idea ...... I wonder why it made idle. Since we are in a world of social networking, why not a social keyboard?
Citadel requires the purchase of a third-party, MAPI connector to be fully integrated with Outlook. I believe the product is called Bynari Connector
It is true that OpenChange and SOGo look very promising and I am following the news with quite a bit of interest. One day it will be production ready. That said, Open Xchange is open source to a point. I think Open-Xchange is more crippleware because you have to buy the product in order to get Outlook integration, or at least the last time I looked into it.
I always wondered why the cartels haven't invested in UAVs. It must be pretty simple now days to build a GPS guided device with enough payload to make the more expensive drugs worthwhile to ship
Especially because many of these cartels have cash and valuables on hand to rival the GDP of smaller second and third world countries. Hire an engineer and use some off the shelf components. GPS is cheap now.
I see they haven't figured out our advanced potato cannon technology yet.
Funny, I wondered why they hadn't tried that. Seems it would be more efficient and quicker. Some compressed air, poof, and voila air mail delivery of the drug du jour.
are they fake but most of the files advertising pirated software or movies are actually viruses and other malware.
Well said! +1
Nothing takes out a drone like a guided shoulder-launched missile :)
With powerful technology and the constant downward pressure of the prices of technology, the barrier of entry to filmmaking is coming down. You could now, in theory, use VP8 and make an independent film without worrying about royalties.
I think the author of the article makes an astoundingly poor conclusion. In reality, America is losing its technical prowess, not due to engineers being labeled as geeks/outsiders, but because engineering jobs are being shipped overseas. Engineering jobs are being given to India, China, Singapore, Taiwan, etc. Since government has rewarded industry in terms of tax breaks for offshoring jobs and other travesties, there is little or no incentive to go through the hard work and schooling to become an engineer when there is a dearth of jobs available. America is a service economy and a service economy is essentially third world stagnation.
I see this happen all of the time. It really comes down to the fact that IT workers in the U.S. have no power and virtually little recourse of any kind. IT could benefit from unionizing but there is such a pervasive culture of fear that it would never happen. Unions can prevent petty situations like the story above by setting hard and fast contractual rules with the force of law not some arbitrary HR policy. We are treated at best as an expendable asset and at worst, an intangible liability. I am in the process of starting my own business and if and when I get big enough, I plan to start a new trend in which the "throwing under the bus" mentality will not be tolerated!
I would probably have more to say on this one but Goldman-Sachs and Facebook are both evil. I wish they would just cancel each other out!
I think the whole argument is really over peanuts. I care little about the technical merits of either side. Personally, my eyes cannot distinguish between good H.264 and WebM. They both look equally as good. So one might be marginally faster or even marginally better? I would rather go for the patent unencumbered technology because I don't want to be threatened with a royalty lawsuit for maybe making some money off of a video I shot. I want to completely own the videos that I shoot. It comes down to a legal argument versus a technical one. It is all well and good if there are ISO standards surrounding H.264 but if using it brings lawsuit storm clouds overhead, no thanks! Everyone here is trying to make a technical argument when the article is looking at legal issues.
No, it's not illegal and it is very easy to do. You're talking about competition with ISPs. The article is talking about an entirely separate internet free of corporate and/or government involvement with no routing back to the original internet. Make it grass roots enough and neither government nor corporations can do anything. Literally, you use high gain wireless antennas and make it a house-to-house, building-to-building thing. At no time does any of the infrastructure cross AT&T, Sprint, Qwest, et al networks. It goes over unlicensed radio spectrum.