I guess the solution actually is to create more standards. If everyone already uses three or four video formats, it won't be so difficult to topple one that isn't playing nice.
It's basically no barrier. If you want to research the strain, you're going to need a sample anyways so you're going to have to correspond with the researchers in some way to get the code and the sample.
Chromium has no software updater. I either have to download a separate add-on that gives me an icon when an update is available, or I have to check their website for updates. And I still need to download and install them. Or I could use an external program to automate some of that. A giant hassle just to keep it updated.
I did the same thing when I bought my first pocket watch. Why would I want a fragile piece of electronics on my wrist where it will just get bumped, damaged, and catch the hair on my wrists when I can keep something in my pocket? Wrist watches are dead and good riddance.
You don't see any solution? How about shorter copyright terms so people can redistribute the works instead of needing to privately hoard them for 95 years.
Does Viz release these shows in DRM-free downloadable formats? I'd imagine not. So even that one falls under the convenience category.
Only very rarely is media released in DRM-free downloadable formats. Baen Ebooks, Tor/Forge, and Louis CK's shows are the most popular examples I know of, but it is very rare. I can think of no broadcasted or cable television show that allows it.
There are sites where you simply vote on new features for OSS and the team uses the votes to gauge user interest in features. Attaching money to those votes adds incentive. Keep in mind that open source developers are in many cases coding for free to begin with. So if a lot of users want them to add a feature, they may be inclined to do so, regardless of financial incentives.
The purpose of that code is to make sure HTTPS is used to grab the script if you are browsing the HTTPS site, and to make sure HTTP is used if you are browsing with HTTP. A better alternative is to use a protocol relative url i.e. "//js-agent.newrelic.com/nr-100.js".
Censorship is not just about "GOVERNMENT suppressing freedom of expression". Terms on privately-owned sites is still a form of censorship—the legal kind. Only government censorship is illegal in the U.S.
At best that would give me 1 tuner per set-top box, but I've read the Uverse STBs are very troublesome to control with IR blasters. At this point I regret my decision to go with Uverse every time I turn on my television, and I'm counting the days until my contract is up and I can move to cable.
Though I've read there are problems with cable as well. MythTV can only watch the Copy Freely channels, and many cable companies use Copy Once flags. I suppose doing all these things forces customers to lease your proprietary equipment. Because it does not have any effect on piracy. And it's not like there's any real competition in the market: all the TV companies use some type of proprietary protection.
I have AT&T Uverse. Their commercial set-top boxes actually let me watch TV, which is certainly a step up from MythTV which has no way of decrypting their proprietary IPTV streams. I know of no third-party equipment capable of decrypting it.
I remember the Slashdot thread from a while back which lambasted the FCC's effort to regulate IPTV. Otherwise MythTV might actually become compatible with IPTV services. What a scary thought.
This sounds remarkably like security + obfuscation to me. The two are not necessarily mutually exclusive. If they had released it open source, one could argue that with more eyes reading the code they would be able to find and eliminate bugs or security issues. But this is not necessarily true. And they clearly did not want to release the software open source.
Slashdot Mirror
BerliOS ran into financial troubles recently. Not sure if they'd be a good pick for long term hosting.
I use Github Releases.
You could also use Internet Archive, which offers unlimited file storage and bandwidth. Yes, you can use them for this.
A lot of great documents have been found at the ancient Oxyrhynchus garbage dump.
Google wants you to use your real name everywhere. And you have little to no say in the matter.
I guess the solution actually is to create more standards. If everyone already uses three or four video formats, it won't be so difficult to topple one that isn't playing nice.
It's basically no barrier. If you want to research the strain, you're going to need a sample anyways so you're going to have to correspond with the researchers in some way to get the code and the sample.
Isn't that because of bugs in the browser?
At least none of them caught fire... yet.
And they weren't used as spycams to watch the kids in their houses... yet.
Chromium has no software updater. I either have to download a separate add-on that gives me an icon when an update is available, or I have to check their website for updates. And I still need to download and install them. Or I could use an external program to automate some of that. A giant hassle just to keep it updated.
Chromium is still brought to you by the people that brought you RLZ Tracking. Also see https://github.com/nylira/prism-break/issues/169
Obviously it's a great web browser. But its greatness is from the same reason that I avoid it: Google.
Let me know when they remove RLZ Tracking and maybe I'll start to trust them as a web browser.
I did the same thing when I bought my first pocket watch. Why would I want a fragile piece of electronics on my wrist where it will just get bumped, damaged, and catch the hair on my wrists when I can keep something in my pocket? Wrist watches are dead and good riddance.
You don't see any solution? How about shorter copyright terms so people can redistribute the works instead of needing to privately hoard them for 95 years.
Libraries aren't usually thought of as being per-user subscriptions.
I thought I was weird for using a laptop as an HTPC, but I guess others do it too.
Does Viz release these shows in DRM-free downloadable formats? I'd imagine not. So even that one falls under the convenience category.
Only very rarely is media released in DRM-free downloadable formats. Baen Ebooks, Tor/Forge, and Louis CK's shows are the most popular examples I know of, but it is very rare. I can think of no broadcasted or cable television show that allows it.
Does it implement asymmetric cryptography in JavaScript on the client? No, but it should.
Technically it's good for the people might be in contact with the one's that have universal flu. The people that already have it are goners.
There are sites where you simply vote on new features for OSS and the team uses the votes to gauge user interest in features. Attaching money to those votes adds incentive. Keep in mind that open source developers are in many cases coding for free to begin with. So if a lot of users want them to add a feature, they may be inclined to do so, regardless of financial incentives.
The purpose of that code is to make sure HTTPS is used to grab the script if you are browsing the HTTPS site, and to make sure HTTP is used if you are browsing with HTTP. A better alternative is to use a protocol relative url i.e. "//js-agent.newrelic.com/nr-100.js".
Censorship is not just about "GOVERNMENT suppressing freedom of expression". Terms on privately-owned sites is still a form of censorship—the legal kind. Only government censorship is illegal in the U.S.
At best that would give me 1 tuner per set-top box, but I've read the Uverse STBs are very troublesome to control with IR blasters. At this point I regret my decision to go with Uverse every time I turn on my television, and I'm counting the days until my contract is up and I can move to cable.
Though I've read there are problems with cable as well. MythTV can only watch the Copy Freely channels, and many cable companies use Copy Once flags. I suppose doing all these things forces customers to lease your proprietary equipment. Because it does not have any effect on piracy. And it's not like there's any real competition in the market: all the TV companies use some type of proprietary protection.
I have AT&T Uverse. Their commercial set-top boxes actually let me watch TV, which is certainly a step up from MythTV which has no way of decrypting their proprietary IPTV streams. I know of no third-party equipment capable of decrypting it.
I remember the Slashdot thread from a while back which lambasted the FCC's effort to regulate IPTV. Otherwise MythTV might actually become compatible with IPTV services. What a scary thought.
Survival of the fittest also works with chemical weapons: those that evolved to have an immunity to Sarin gas will survive.
That is exactly what Open Library does:
http://blog.archive.org/2010/06/29/small-moves-open-library-integrates-digital-lending/
WSJ article: http://archive.is/1qgty
Whether this type of fair use would stand up in court remains to be seen.
This sounds remarkably like security + obfuscation to me. The two are not necessarily mutually exclusive. If they had released it open source, one could argue that with more eyes reading the code they would be able to find and eliminate bugs or security issues. But this is not necessarily true. And they clearly did not want to release the software open source.