Goes without saying for us lot, but be really careful looking at the list if you have a browser with a link accelerator (that crawls forward links and caches them). Could find yourself catching someone's attention, not if you're in Australia though, the feds are too busy running after the people who leaked the list that isn't really the list.
What if browsers completely refused to connect to web sites where there is a domain name mismatch in the certificate? Sure, it would make things pretty hard for a while, but at least there wouldn't be the quick and dirty (and dangerous) fix of support people telling customer's to "just ignore it". Businesses would, shock horror, have to actually fix the underlying problem!
I can't help but think if browsers had always been this strict, the world would be a safer place and this really wouldn't be an issue.
Even if you use self signed certificates, there's no excuse for certificate domain miss-match.
Actually, we Australians can at the moment.
The blacklist isn't being enforced yet, it merely forms the basis for third party filters.
However, this could change with the proposed mandatory filter being considered by the current Federal Government.
Cheaper than jamming, why not set up wireless signal detectors (like those used to detect the presence of WiFi networks) to allow the pin-pointing of illegally smuggled in devices. These would cost a fraction of cost of jamming devices, not have questionable legalities and would allow prosecution of those caught illegally using devices inside goal.
Actually, if they are *always* wrong, they're actually quite useful for binary yes/no decisions because all you have to do is invert their answer to get the correct one.
It's like having a Bit Error Rate of 1 (always wrong) is fantastic. Just put in a not gate and your error rate becomes 0!
In daily use I use mac, linux and windows. 99% of the time these are in some form of suspend mode. Booting your computer is virtually a thing of the past for me, I couldn't care less if it took 60 or 6 seconds to boot really. Things like hybrid or safe sleep remove the risk of data loss due to power failure too.
The most important thing to me is that sleep is instant and reliable and it has taken OSs a long time to get there. Mac OS I find to be the most reliable and quickest (but given the significant advantage of limited hardware set and the fact that apple write all the kernel drivers), Windows is fairly good with most hardware and Vista is almost as quick as Mac OS. Linux is catching up fast, I have an EEE PC running Ubuntu 8.10 and it is *almost* instantaneous (still get a blinking cursor before the X server comes back to life) but I've found reliability to still be a bit of an issue.
"Bigtime movie producers" can afford to employ people with the sole purpose of maintaining and configuring linux. Small/Medium businesses that specialise in graphic design like to do just that, graphic design. They don't want to have to open up a console to pair a bluetooth mouse (although I am told the latest version of Ubuntu has changed this).
Yes linux is getting better by the day, but it isn't quite there for some users.
If it really is Apple's fault for releasing a buggy driver, Microsoft should put out an update that marks the latest iTunes as having compatibility issues with Vista.
But the flip side is that if you obtain stolen property it doesn't matter if you accepted it in good faith, it's still not yours and you have to return it.
Yes but he is correct in stating that knowing someone else's IMEI is a bad thing (for them). You can re-birth phones marked as stolen by knowing someone's IMEI. It then results in havoc when two devices with the same IMEI connect to the same network.
Aren't the mentions of a PHP automailer in the header enough proof that it was not a personal message? Shouldn't this have been explained to the Judge?
This reminds me of the stupid rule in monopoly where if a person bankrupts another player for even the most smallest amount, they get all of their properties. So the game becomes a race to bankrupt someone before someone else (or the bank) does...
Actually, I'm pretty sure you can patent the design of a "microchip" without ever producing one. By design I mean for example the novel implementation of an algorithm for silicon. A company I used to work for does this all the time. For them, novel implementations were the #1 patent source.
Being the devil's advocate here, why shouldn't algorithm and software engineers have access to the same IP protection as hardware engineer? If you really disagree with patents, then why not argue that they should not apply to hardware design? IMHO software needs patents more than hardware. Why? Well because as you mention that a microchip requires an industrial fab plant (and as such costs tens of thousands of dollars to run even a small batch),due to this isn't it hardware to duplicate hardware than software?
To me, the work that an algorithm researcher does is the same whether it is implemented in software and hardware and therefore the rules should be the same (one way or another).
One thing that I've always wondered, what about "inventions" that can be implemented in either software or hardware? What about say an algorithm that could be fixed in silicon, or written as DSP code? More and more devices are becoming firmware and middle-ware based, as an example, software radios for wireless devices. Is it the case that the underlying algorithm can be patented, but not the actual software implementation (so that someone implementing the algorithm would need permission, even for software)?
It all seems weird and inconsistent to me!
Even so, 0.15% is over 2 million square kilometres by your estimates...
Oh and your lunar solar cell idea reminds me of the microwave power plants that Sim City 2000 had:-) It was always funny when the energy beam missed the power plant and burnt a hole in your city!
Not sure how smart modern P2P programs are, but would this mean that if x users shared the same track (but with each of their names in it), the P2P programs wouldn't detect the songs as the same song as they have different hashes? Or are P2P programs more clever than this and only generate the hash on the binary portion of the file (which would make sense to account for differences in tagging information)?
Interestingly, in Australia the court system has found on several occasions to date that "grey importing" (unofficial importing) is legal and in fact (as sony found out: http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/06/ 1211211) circumvention of devices which prevent grey importing (e.g mod chips which get around region encoding) is also legal.
It's interesting/scary how countries seem to go in virtually completely different directions on some of these issues (and in this case it is the UK and Australia which have inherited the same legal system).
Not exactly true. In Australia, transmissions are generally in both SD (DVD resolution) and HD (1080i or 720p) when the program has been filmed as such. Whilst SD boxes can be found at under AU$50 (under US$40) HD set top boxes are about twice as expensive (AU$100/US$75). Thanks to Moore's Law the "far beefier chips" that were once prohibitively expensive when HDTV was released back in 2000 are now easy/cheap to manufacture.
Actually what generally happens is that a technology will have a very hard time being standardized unless companies with lots of say in the ratification process hold patents they can enforce. This means that the standardization process will tend to avoid patents from bodies not involved in the standardization meetings.
So the only way for an outsider to get a patent on a key area is to do exactly what the CSIRO have done in this case. Many standards ignore "the best" technologies just because outsider companies hold the patents. This happens in the 3GPP all the time and I'd presume it happens with the IEEE too.
As an example: The 3GPP has held onto using Turbo codes for Forward Error correction in 3G/UMTS years past its used by date, even though LDPC codes have been around for years and are considered superior (and have already been used in DVB et al). The reason being: certain companies involved in the 3GPP have key patents in Turbo code implementations and would loose out if a rival technology was selected.
and people (read: windows users) *should* use a virus scanner, but generally they don't so your argument is flawed.
And for what it's worth, I personally value my data more than my privacy, after all if you really live and breath the GPL paradigm shouldn't you publish all data you product?:P
Slashdot Mirror
Goes without saying for us lot, but be really careful looking at the list if you have a browser with a link accelerator (that crawls forward links and caches them). Could find yourself catching someone's attention, not if you're in Australia though, the feds are too busy running after the people who leaked the list that isn't really the list.
What if browsers completely refused to connect to web sites where there is a domain name mismatch in the certificate? Sure, it would make things pretty hard for a while, but at least there wouldn't be the quick and dirty (and dangerous) fix of support people telling customer's to "just ignore it". Businesses would, shock horror, have to actually fix the underlying problem! I can't help but think if browsers had always been this strict, the world would be a safer place and this really wouldn't be an issue. Even if you use self signed certificates, there's no excuse for certificate domain miss-match.
Actually, we Australians can at the moment. The blacklist isn't being enforced yet, it merely forms the basis for third party filters. However, this could change with the proposed mandatory filter being considered by the current Federal Government.
Cheaper than jamming, why not set up wireless signal detectors (like those used to detect the presence of WiFi networks) to allow the pin-pointing of illegally smuggled in devices. These would cost a fraction of cost of jamming devices, not have questionable legalities and would allow prosecution of those caught illegally using devices inside goal.
Actually, if they are *always* wrong, they're actually quite useful for binary yes/no decisions because all you have to do is invert their answer to get the correct one. It's like having a Bit Error Rate of 1 (always wrong) is fantastic. Just put in a not gate and your error rate becomes 0!
In daily use I use mac, linux and windows. 99% of the time these are in some form of suspend mode. Booting your computer is virtually a thing of the past for me, I couldn't care less if it took 60 or 6 seconds to boot really. Things like hybrid or safe sleep remove the risk of data loss due to power failure too. The most important thing to me is that sleep is instant and reliable and it has taken OSs a long time to get there. Mac OS I find to be the most reliable and quickest (but given the significant advantage of limited hardware set and the fact that apple write all the kernel drivers), Windows is fairly good with most hardware and Vista is almost as quick as Mac OS. Linux is catching up fast, I have an EEE PC running Ubuntu 8.10 and it is *almost* instantaneous (still get a blinking cursor before the X server comes back to life) but I've found reliability to still be a bit of an issue.
"Bigtime movie producers" can afford to employ people with the sole purpose of maintaining and configuring linux. Small/Medium businesses that specialise in graphic design like to do just that, graphic design. They don't want to have to open up a console to pair a bluetooth mouse (although I am told the latest version of Ubuntu has changed this). Yes linux is getting better by the day, but it isn't quite there for some users.
If it really is Apple's fault for releasing a buggy driver, Microsoft should put out an update that marks the latest iTunes as having compatibility issues with Vista.
"It was the best of times, it was the BLURST of times!?! Stupid monkeys!"
But the flip side is that if you obtain stolen property it doesn't matter if you accepted it in good faith, it's still not yours and you have to return it.
Also, triple J put up free music on their web site to download: http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/listen/mp3s.htm
Yes but he is correct in stating that knowing someone else's IMEI is a bad thing (for them). You can re-birth phones marked as stolen by knowing someone's IMEI. It then results in havoc when two devices with the same IMEI connect to the same network.
Aren't the mentions of a PHP automailer in the header enough proof that it was not a personal message? Shouldn't this have been explained to the Judge?
This reminds me of the stupid rule in monopoly where if a person bankrupts another player for even the most smallest amount, they get all of their properties. So the game becomes a race to bankrupt someone before someone else (or the bank) does...
First there was Enron shutting off the power and now we have the Federal Government shutting off their Internet!
...is this just advertising on slashdot? Is this *really* news?
Actually, I'm pretty sure you can patent the design of a "microchip" without ever producing one. By design I mean for example the novel implementation of an algorithm for silicon. A company I used to work for does this all the time. For them, novel implementations were the #1 patent source. Being the devil's advocate here, why shouldn't algorithm and software engineers have access to the same IP protection as hardware engineer? If you really disagree with patents, then why not argue that they should not apply to hardware design? IMHO software needs patents more than hardware. Why? Well because as you mention that a microchip requires an industrial fab plant (and as such costs tens of thousands of dollars to run even a small batch),due to this isn't it hardware to duplicate hardware than software? To me, the work that an algorithm researcher does is the same whether it is implemented in software and hardware and therefore the rules should be the same (one way or another).
One thing that I've always wondered, what about "inventions" that can be implemented in either software or hardware? What about say an algorithm that could be fixed in silicon, or written as DSP code? More and more devices are becoming firmware and middle-ware based, as an example, software radios for wireless devices. Is it the case that the underlying algorithm can be patented, but not the actual software implementation (so that someone implementing the algorithm would need permission, even for software)? It all seems weird and inconsistent to me!
Even so, 0.15% is over 2 million square kilometres by your estimates... Oh and your lunar solar cell idea reminds me of the microwave power plants that Sim City 2000 had :-) It was always funny when the energy beam missed the power plant and burnt a hole in your city!
Not sure how smart modern P2P programs are, but would this mean that if x users shared the same track (but with each of their names in it), the P2P programs wouldn't detect the songs as the same song as they have different hashes? Or are P2P programs more clever than this and only generate the hash on the binary portion of the file (which would make sense to account for differences in tagging information)?
Interestingly, in Australia the court system has found on several occasions to date that "grey importing" (unofficial importing) is legal and in fact (as sony found out: http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/06/ 1211211) circumvention of devices which prevent grey importing (e.g mod chips which get around region encoding) is also legal.
It's interesting/scary how countries seem to go in virtually completely different directions on some of these issues (and in this case it is the UK and Australia which have inherited the same legal system).
Better hope the BBC's Panorama don't hear about this one! http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/05/2 6/1954220&from=rss
Not exactly true. In Australia, transmissions are generally in both SD (DVD resolution) and HD (1080i or 720p) when the program has been filmed as such. Whilst SD boxes can be found at under AU$50 (under US$40) HD set top boxes are about twice as expensive (AU$100/US$75). Thanks to Moore's Law the "far beefier chips" that were once prohibitively expensive when HDTV was released back in 2000 are now easy/cheap to manufacture.
Actually what generally happens is that a technology will have a very hard time being standardized unless companies with lots of say in the ratification process hold patents they can enforce. This means that the standardization process will tend to avoid patents from bodies not involved in the standardization meetings. So the only way for an outsider to get a patent on a key area is to do exactly what the CSIRO have done in this case. Many standards ignore "the best" technologies just because outsider companies hold the patents. This happens in the 3GPP all the time and I'd presume it happens with the IEEE too. As an example: The 3GPP has held onto using Turbo codes for Forward Error correction in 3G/UMTS years past its used by date, even though LDPC codes have been around for years and are considered superior (and have already been used in DVB et al). The reason being: certain companies involved in the 3GPP have key patents in Turbo code implementations and would loose out if a rival technology was selected.
and people (read: windows users) *should* use a virus scanner, but generally they don't so your argument is flawed. And for what it's worth, I personally value my data more than my privacy, after all if you really live and breath the GPL paradigm shouldn't you publish all data you product? :P