|
|
|
*HOT* Tech News And Downloads, I Would Read This Thread And Post Any Good Info
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
11. June 2007 @ 07:51 |
Link to this message
|
Hollywood on The Hill
p2pnet.net news view:- When Canadian Heritage Minister Bev Oda and Industry Minister Maxime Bernier stepped up to the podium on Parliament Hill ten days ago to introduce new movie piracy legislation, the scene had an unmistakable Hollywood feel. Surrounded by movie posters and attendees munching on popcorn, the Ministers were given a standing ovation from the assembled industry representatives for their performance.
While the press conference had a few uncomfortable moments - Oda was forced to admit that the government had not conducted any independent research on the scope of the movie piracy problem and she implausibly told reporters that public pressure from U.S. politicians such as California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and U.S. Ambassador to Canada David Wilkins had nothing to do with the new bill - the intended storyline was of Ministers pleased to support the film industry and of an industry grateful for government action.
As with any Hollywood production, however, not everything took place while the cameras were rolling. According to documents obtained under the Access to Information Act, Oda held a private meeting in Ottawa with Canadian Motion Pictures Distributors Association President Douglas Frith one year earlier, at which Frith provided the government with draft legislation - legislation that the lobby group itself had crafted - that likely served as the basis for what is now Bill C-59.
Moreover, a briefing note prepared by department officials for Oda in advance of the CMPDA meeting help explain the barrage of lobby pressure on the camcording issue as the Minister was advised that there was little evidence that the industry?s proposal would prove more effective that current Canadian law.
The CMPDA meeting focused on several issues, including counterfeiting and signal theft, yet it was a movie piracy amendment to the Criminal Code that was clearly top of mind. An advance CMPDA briefing document claimed that legislative reforms were needed to address the growth of unauthorized camcording in Canadian movie theatres.
Much like Bill C-59, which contains a maximum jail term of five years for the recording of a movie in a theatre for the purposes of commercial distribution without the consent of the theatre owner, the CMPDA draft bill similarly envisioned a maximum of five years imprisonment for "any person who knowingly operates the audiovisual recording function of any device in a public place while a cinematographic work is being exhibited."
In fact, the CMPDA bill arguably went even further than Bill C-59, as the industry also sought maximum penalties of $1 million per recording and an unspecified minimum penalty. Furthermore, it criminalized movie recording in any public place (C-59 only covers movie theatres) and did not require commercial distribution to invoke the toughest penalties (C-59 includes a lesser maximum sentence of two years in jail for movie recording without commercial distribution).
Department officials were not persuaded by the proposal, however, warning in the Ministerial briefing note that the penalty provisions in the Copyright Act are already criminal offences and that "it is unclear how these measures would prove more efficient." That conclusion is consistent with comments from Justice Minister Rob Nicholson, who in February rejected the calls for movie piracy legislation by noting that "the country is not completely bereft of laws in this area."
In light of the tepid response, the industry went on the offensive, threatening to delay the release of movies in the Canadian theatres, canceling Canadian pre-screenings, enlisting the support of U.S. officials, and floating inconsistent claims of Canadian responsibility for global camcording that ranged from 20 to 70 percent (the Oda briefing note stated that Montreal alone was responsible for 40 percent of unauthorized film reproductions in the world market, twice what CMPDA now claims for all of Canada).
The industry's lobby efforts were clearly successful. Ignoring the inconsistent claims, the absence of evidence that Canadian films are being affected, the contrary internal advice, and the bracing reality that Hollywood has acknowledged that the U.S. is by far the largest source of illegal camcording worldwide notwithstanding its movie piracy legislation, Bill C-59 is expected to sail quickly through Parliament.
In doing so, Ottawa is sending Canadians two messages. The first is what drew the industry standing ovation - unauthorized camcording will not be tolerated in Canada even if it means diverting law enforcement resources from health and safety issues to movie theatres. The second is that private meetings, foreign pressures, and lobbyist drafted bills is how law gets made in Canada.
Michael Geist
[Geist is the Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law at the University of Ottawa. He can be reached by email at mgeist[at]uottawa.ca and is on-line at www.michaelgeist.ca.]
http://p2pnet.net/story/12470
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
11. June 2007 @ 07:53 |
Link to this message
|
Save Aunty from DRM
p2pnet.net news:- Britons and other fans of the BBC around the world fear the cherished national radio broadcasting service, lovingly known as Aunty and which kept spirits alive during World War II, may finally be killed ----- by DRM.
"We are deeply concerned about the BBC's use of 'Digital Rights Management' (DRM) to manage content delivered to users over the Internet," says Free The BBC, a campaign created by The Binary Freedom Press Office and Binary Freedom Boston, with help from Defective By Design.
"There are dozens of arguments against DRM, however we believe these are the most important and relevant to the BBC."
Click here to put your name to the letter, which goes on >>>>>>>>>>>>>
1. DRM simply doesn't work.
Producers of DRM technology tell copyright holders that DRM will protect their content from unauthorized copying and commercial piracy. This is completely false. All DRM systems, including new technologies like HD-DVD and Blu-ray, have been circumvented. DRM relies on users not knowing an encryption key that is widely distributed to devices that play content. Cracking DRM is then as simple as discovering the encryption key. In such a situation, the entire DRM system is circumvented and the argument to "protect copyrighted materials" is removed. In addition, many programs that may use DRM are already broadcast over-the-air and this content can easily be converted into unprotected digital format. Even if DRM worked it would not protect BBC content.
DRM's defectiveness, is part of the reason that Steve Jobs, CEO of Apple, called on the music industry to release DRM-free music. ("Thoughts on Music", February 6, 2007)
2. DRM strips consumers of their rights.
By using DRM, the BBC is telling users that they are criminals. DRM assumes that a user will use the content they are provided with to violate copyright law and in response strips users of their normal consumer rights. In the United Kingdom, the fair dealing privilege is meant to provide an exception to copyright for "private study and criticism and review and news reporting" (Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 s. 29, 30). DRM makes it illegal to extract portions of a work for criticism or review. Fair dealing is meant to allow, among other things, private copies for research purposes, or extraction of portions for a film review. DRM attempts to make both of these impossible, thereby depriving citizens of rights guaranteed to them by British law. Other countries, such as the United States, grant similar rights under other fair dealing or fair use doctrines. The BBC would also be similarly depriving citizens of those countries of their statutory rights.
Since the BBC is a public corporation, it should be acting in the interest of the general public. Any action that removes the rights of the general public is not acting in their interest.
3. DRM directly violates the BBC Royal Charter.
The BBC royal charter establishes a number of goals and operating conditions including "promoting education and learning", "stimulating creativity and cultural excellence", and "bringing the UK to the world". DRM runs contrary to all of these purposes. DRM limits education by restricting copying for public educational purposes, and even inhibits private study. It stifles creativity by trying to make even incidental remixing impossible. Finally, it arbitrarily limits the BBC's reach by forcing viewers to use particular proprietary software applications. DRM advances corporate interests over the public interest, which is in flagrant opposition to the charter.
4. DRM is a poor business decision.
If people are unable to take content they have purchased and use it for their own personal purposes, then they will choose other locations to receive that content. This is one of the reasons why EMI recently agreed to sell their music without DRM.
Additionally, the data is formatted to restrict access to Windows users. The BBC has decided to release content under the Windows Media Format. The Windows Media Format (WMF) is a proprietary system. As licenses for other operating systems are not available, users have to buy Microsoft Windows. This choice would restrict BBC content to a portion of the population, excluding users of operating systems such as GNU/Linux (which is powering the one laptop per child system). The BBC is also considering the use of REAL media, which has players for other operating systems. However, REAL is still unacceptable, because there are no libre/open source software that can play REAL media with DRM. This is an insurmountable problem common to all DRM systems. The BBC is a public corporation and its funding comes from public sources. If people pay for a service, they should only have to pay for it once. With WMF, REAL, and DRM, they are having to pay twice (once to have the content created and once to have it shown to them through WMF or REAL). In addition, since both systems require particular proprietary software applications, BBC is in effect subsidizing unrelated private enterprises.
5. The Industry has Ditched it
The media industry is already stopping the use of DRM. Apple iTunes, Amazon Music, PBS, C-SPAN, NPR, and many other large media outlets will soon offer DRM-free content or already offer it. Seeing as this is the way the industry is moving, it is an irresponsible use of public funds to force the use of a technology the industry is moving away from.
In conclusion, DRM is not the right path for the BBC to take. DRM violates the royal charter, attacks users, adds cost to production, subsidizes private enterprises, and simply does not work. We urge you to drop all plans to lock away content with DRM and to choose public interest instead. This is an issue of viewer's rights, free culture and the future of the BBC. Please respect the public interest, and your viewer interests, by not using DRM.
http://p2pnet.net/story/12472
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
11. June 2007 @ 07:55 |
Link to this message
|
Billions in new fees for webcasters?
p2pnet.net news:- Webcasters ranging from small college stations to major stations say they're in mortal danger following a Copyright Royalty Board decision to boost royalty rates, slated to go into effect on July 15.
But things could be worse, billions of dollars per year worse, say RealNetworks, Yahoo, Pandora and Live365
The companies say the music industry will also be demanding $1 billion annually from Yahoo, RealNetworks and Pandora alone, "in the name of covering so-called administrative costs," says CNET News.
When the CRB decided to change the rules for broadcasters, it also announced a $500 minimum annual fee per Net radio channel SoundExchange ( the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America spin-off used to collect royalties "and other fees" for the major record labels), says the story, going on:
"But since some of the larger Internet radio services potentially offer their listeners hundreds of thousands of unique 'channels' (RealNetworks' Rhapsody offered more than 400,000 in 2006 alone, according to a company spokesman), the companies view the ruling as forcing them to multiply that mandatory minimum payment accordingly (for Real, that would amount to $200 million).
"Such an amount would far outpace the $20 million in total royalty fees collected by SoundExchange from the Internet radio industry last year, the CEOs note in their letter. And besides, it's not even clear that those payments would go to artists, as royalty payments do, the companies argue."
SoundExchange hasn't so far commented, says the story.
Meanwhile, "Royalty rates for webcasters have been drastically increased by a recent ruling and are due to go into effect on July 15 (retroactive to Jan 1, 2006!)," says SaveNetRadio. "If the increased rates remain unchanged, the majority of webcasters will go bankrupt and silent on this date."
http://p2pnet.net/story/12466
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
11. June 2007 @ 07:58 |
Link to this message
|
Google flunks major privacy study
p2pnet.net news:- 'Do no evil' Google was the only company to completely fail an important six-month investigation into privacy practices employed by key Net-based companies.
But, not one of the organizations included managed 'green' status and overall, "the privacy standard of the key Internet players is appalling, with some companies demonstrating either wilful or a mindless disregard for the privacy rights of their customers," says Privacy International., which produced the scathing study.
The exploitation of new technologies and tools, "will result in one of the greatest privacy challenges in recent decades," it states. We're, "witnessing an increased 'race to the bottom' in corporate surveillance of customers".
Some companies are leading the charge, "through abusive and invasive profiling of their customers' data" and, "This trend is seen by even the most privacy friendly companies as creating competitive disadvantage to those who do not follow that trend, and in some cases to find new and more innovative ways to become even more surveillance-intensive," says the report.
"Most importantly, we wanted to indicate to the marketplace that their surveillance and tracking activities are being scrutinised," it declares.
Companies surveyed included: Amazon; AOL; Apple; BBC; Bebo; eBay; Facebook; Friendster; Google; Hi5; Last.fm; LinkedIn; LiveJournal; Microsoft; Myspace; Orkut; Reunion.com; Skype; Wikipedia; Windows Live Space; Xanga; Yahoo!; and, YouTube.
The Net appears to be shifting as a whole toward this aim, "and the opportunity to create market differentiators based on responsible privacy may diminish unless those avenues are explored immediately," says PI, and consumers are right to feel aggrieved when companies fail to adopt the best privacy tools that are available.
Why Google?
"We are aware that the decision to place Google at the bottom of the ranking is likely to be controversial, but throughout our research we have found numerous deficiencies and hostilities in Google's approach to privacy that go well beyond those of other organizations," says PI, continuing:
While a number of companies share some of these negative elements, none comes close to achieving status as an endemic threat to privacy. This is in part due to the diversity and specificity of Google's product range and the ability of the company to share extracted data between these tools, and in part it is due to Google's market dominance and the sheer size of its user base. Google's status in the ranking is also due to its aggressive use of invasive or potentially invasive technologies and techniques.
The view that Google "opens up" information through a range of attractive and advanced tools does not exempt the company from demonstrating responsible leadership in privacy. Google's increasing ability to deep-drill into the minutiae of a user's life and lifestyle choices must in our view be coupled with well defined and mature user controls and an equally mature privacy outlook. Neither of these elements has been demonstrated. Rather, we have witnessed an attitude to privacy within Google that at its most blatant is hostile, and at its most benign is ambivalent. These dynamics do not pervade other major players such as Microsoft or eBay, both of which have made notable improvements to the corporate ethos on privacy issues.
In the closing days of our research we received a copy of supplemental material relating to a complaint to the Federal Trade Commission concerning the pending merger between Google and DoubleClick. This material, submitted by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) and coupled with a submission to the FTC from the New York State Consumer Protection Board, provided additional weight for our assessment that Google has created the most onerous privacy environment on the Internet. The Board expressed concern that these profiles expose consumers to the risk of disclosure of their data to third-parties, as well as public disclosure as evidence in litigation or through data breaches. The EPIC submission set out a detailed analysis of Google's existing data practices, most of which fell well short of the standard that consumers might expect. During the course of our research the Article 29 Working Group of European privacy regulators also expressed concern at the scale of Google's activities, and requested detailed information from the company.
In summary, Google's specific privacy failures include, but are by no means limited to:
- Google account holders that regularly use even a few of Google's services must accept that the company retains a large quantity of information about that user, often for an unstated or indefinite length of time, without clear limitation on subsequent use or disclosure, and without an opportunity to delete or withdraw personal data even if the user wishes to terminate the service.
- Google maintains records of all search strings and the associated IP-addresses and time stamps for at least 18 to 24 months and does not provide users with an expungement option. While it is true that many US based companies have not yet established a time frame for retention, there is a prevailing view amongst privacy experts that 18 to 24 months is unacceptable, and possibly unlawful in many parts of the world.
- Google has access to additional personal information, including hobbies, employment, address, and phone number, contained within user profiles in Orkut. Google often maintains these records even after a user has deleted his profile or removed information from Orkut.
- Google collects all search results entered through Google Toolbar and identifies all Google Toolbar users with a unique cookie that allows Google to track the user's web movement.17 Google does not indicate how long the information collected through Google Toolbar is retained, nor does it offer users a data expungement option in connection with the service.
- Google fails to follow generally accepted privacy practices such as the OECD Privacy Guidelines and elements of EU data protection law. As detailed in the EPIC complaint, Google also fails to adopted additional privacy provisions with respect to specific Google services.
- Google logs search queries in a manner that makes them personally identifiable but fails to provide users with the ability to edit or otherwise expunge records of their previous searches.
- Google fails to give users access to log information generated through their interaction with Google Maps, Google Video, Google Talk, Google Reader, Blogger and other services.
Microsoft is a, "better privacy performer than Google," a finding that's also likely to be contentious, says PI, going on:
Microsoft was awarded 'orange' status, two bands better than Google's position. However it is important, for the sake of clarity, to note that Windows Live Space received the more negative "red" rating, while Google's Orkut avoided a black rating and was awarded red status.
The true difference between Google Inc and Microsoft Corp can be defined not so much by the data practices and privacy policies that exist between the two organizations, but by the corporate ethos and leadership exhibited by each.
Five years ago Microsoft could reasonably be described as a fundamental danger to privacy. In more recent times the organization appears to have adopted a less antagonistic attitude to privacy, and has at least structurally adjusted to the challenge of creating a privacy-friendly environment.
But, Bill and the Boyz are by no means squeaky clean, says the report. There have been "notable privacy disasters,"it says, particularly with WGA (Windows Genuine Advantage), and, "It is equally true that Microsoft has failed to achieve the level of transparency that it proclaims to embrace (for example in withholding the length of time that data is retained).
"These instances have been compounded by a failure of oversight and management. However Microsoft has at least put in place the beginnings of a framework for responsible privacy practice and has created a corporate vision, cloudy though it may be. The organization appears now to be particularly sensitive in the most part to privacy issues and some parts of Microsoft have even pursued the concept of privacy as a market differentiator. We have no evidence that Google has achieved this level of awareness or development."
But, "in the words of the executives, continues PI, "ad space is now the only game in town," and with Microsoft needing to play catch-up with Google, "there is a real threat that the organization could abandon privacy reforms in favor of ad revenue - or at least divert funds away from real protection and toward PR. The 2008 rankings will identify whether this fear will be realized".
http://p2pnet.net/story/12468
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
11. June 2007 @ 08:00 |
Link to this message
|
|
Why French DSL Service Is Like a Rude French Waiter
Bruce Gain Email 06.11.07 | 2:00 AM
PARIS -- France has more broadband DSL customers than most countries, including the United States. But if you happen to be one of the millions of customers having major problems with your connection, then life can be a living hell. High-tech service in France is like service in a Parisian cafe -- intermittent and snooty.
Not a day goes by when 60 Millions de Consommateurs, the French equivalent of Consumer Reports, isn't inundated with complaints from DSL subscribers about a faulty connections, abusive pricing practices or incompetent technical support. Nearly half of all complaints are DSL-related, the publication says.
"Imagine if one customer out of four complained that a bakery's bread was not fresh," the publication wrote.
According to the magazine, one customer was charged more than $120 to call the technical-support hotline of ISP Neuf and still couldn't get a DSL or telephone connection for nine months. Another unhappy customer tried to cancel her service from Orange, but the company continued to debit her account more than $40 per month, even after it confirmed it had received her request in writing. Another customer's ISP admitted that an underground cable was damaged, but simply said they couldn't give a date when it would be repaired.
One government watchdog organization, the Direction Générale de la Concurrence, de la Consommation et de la Répressions des Fraudes, reported that DSL service complaints surged 17.4 percent in 2006.
A spokesman from France Telecom, parent company of Orange, acknowledged what he called "forces majeurs," which he said account for periodic broadband disruptions throughout the country. He listed typical causes such as power failures, floods and other "acts of God."
The France Telecom spokesman admitted that other problems crop up, such as router and PC conflicts, and software glitches, which the average consumer cannot remedy. These problems are compounded by the reluctance -- sometimes the outright refusal -- of French ISPs to provide onsite maintenance.
One ISP, Club Internet, recently remedied problems on its saturated networks only after weeks of outages all over France, without volunteering any reimbursement for lost service.
Requests for reimbursement for poor service are often denied or simply ignored. Legal recourse is an alternative, but litigation in France is significantly costlier and more cumbersome than in the United States.
Annual contracts can oblige customers to continue paying for the service, while the glitches are ignored. Often, faulty DSL lines, modems or other problems that require onsite maintenance to remedy are left to the customer.
Ludovic Guyot, a technician for New-Tek Informatique, a PC reseller and onsite network-support firm in Brittany, said many of his clients are in a helpless state.
"My customers were calling me to come and I told them there was nothing I could do to fix their problems (as an onsite technician)," Guyot said.
French consumers having DSL difficulties usually must pay about 46 cents a minute to talk to customer support, but even if you're willing to spend the money, the quality of the call-center technicians is often poor. ISPs tend to respond to e-mails sent to technical support with boilerplate solutions that don't solve the specific issue.
The problem is that there are at least 10 DSL companies battling for a share of the French market. The companies do a good job of selling services, often bundling phone and TV service with DSL. Unfortunately, the companies make promises to gain subscribers without having the infrastructure in place to make good on them.
Despite often appalling DSL service in France, there has been no severe public backlash.
In a country where government controls keep most critical services -- like medical care -- reliable and affordable, people are used to taking their complaints through the proper channels.
Elected officials have pledged action to force ISPs to improve their services, but little has been done. Last year, for example, a meeting was held between government representatives, ISPs and consumer associations, during which the DSL providers agreed to allow customers to terminate service without having to pay for the full-year contract.
In addition, some ISPs agreed not to charge customers 46 cents a minute when they were put on hold when calling customer support. But, says Benjamin Douriez, a journalist with 60 Million de Consommateurs, this "courtesy" does not represent the norm.
"What they are offering is too late and too little," he says.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
11. June 2007 @ 08:07 |
Link to this message
|
TO READ THE (Ars System Guide) TOTAL GUIDE IT'S A VERY LONG READ
PLEASE GO HERE,
http://arstechnica.com/guides/buyer/guide-200706.ars
Ars System Guide: June 2007
By Brian Won | Published: June 10, 2007 - 11:46PM CT
Doing it yourself
System recommendations are harder to do than most people think, but we've diligently worked to keep our guides up-to-date with the most mouth-watering hardware. Our last regular update saw us going dual-core across the board, and there are a few more changes this month.
Keep in mind that we're not going to just choose the cheapest or highest-quality stuff and throw it together and call it a system. Rather, our guides are meant to reflect real-world issues. For example, we'll tally up prices for you based on what we glean from our own online comparison shopping engine, not vendors that we have special deals with or, even worse, MSRPs. Real-world prices, baby.
And, of course, this is Ars Technica. We are not concerned with what you should be buying your 500-person company for the next mass upgrade. These are the systems that we, your fellow enthusiasts, either have, plan to have, or would love desperately to have. We know how you think; we think that way, too.
The criteria
Now, when recommending products, you've got to take two main factors into account: available funds and performance. Some lucky bastards have unlimited funds; some have to pinch every penny. Most of us are somewhere in between. So, when you say something is the "best thing out there," it's important to ask, "Best for whom?" In recognition of this fact, our recommendations come in the form of three hypothetical computers.
Budget Box (June 2007)
If you're trying to build an inexpensive system, we've got your answer: the Budget Box. This puppy is dedicated to finding the least expensive options possible while still giving you full functionality. The Budget Box may sound cheap, but it's not. It's simply inexpensive power, priced at under $800. It can also handle everything that Vista is able to throw at it.
Hot Rod (June 2007)
Next, there's the Hot Rod. This one's been juiced up, but with limited funds. Think of the auto hobbyist. He may not buy the fastest car out there, but he does the best he can with what he's got. Likewise, the Hot Rod is going to be based on a price/performance ratio, as we look for the best bang for the buck. It's also going to be a system that almost anyone can build. Rather than cook up some mineral-oil soaked, refrigerator-powered machine, we've set out to bring power users systems that will rock without having to be tweaked to extremes. Extreme tweaking is cool, but it's not the purpose of this recommendation.
We try to keep the Hot Rod under $1,600, but we don't always succeed because performance is sometimes worth a few bucks extra.
God Box (June 2007)
Last, but certainly not least, there's the God Box. This is for the guy who has just won the lottery, or whose company is funding the purchase (same thing). Of course, this doesn't imply adding stuff for the hell of it. Even on this spec, we don't want to be wasting money. It will be, however, generally beyond the range of mere mortals.
So how do we define performance? Well, it depends on a lot of things, and can change from day to day. Benchmarks are important, but so are quality issues. Is the video crisp? Is the sound realistic? For each component, we'll try to tell you what factors led to us choosing it. You may disagree. If so, we'd love to hear about it. Maybe you'll even make us change our minds... maybe. Keep an eye out to see what we put in these systems, and stop by often to see how they're updated.
Motherboard
Asus M2NPV-VM
Value is one of the key concepts in the Budget Box, and AMD remains the leader in the Budget Box's price range. Intel fans have some good choices with cheaper Intel P965 chipset-based Core 2 Duo boards, although the lack of a cheap enough CPU limits choices. Feature sets seem to remain fairly well-developed, with dual gigabit Ethernet, FireWire, four SATA 3.0Gb/s ports with RAID capability, PCI-e x16 expansion, four DDR2 sockets, and decent overclocking abilities.
A few dollars might be saved by going to a board without onboard video, Firewire, dual Ethernet connections, and other fancy features, but the additional cost for these features is fairly minimal. In a rig such as the more spartan Ultimate Budget Box, finding something more simple (albeit with onboard video) to save those few dollars might be worth it. A slightly different vein would be the Asus M2N4-SLI, which is slightly cheaper, skips onboard video, and supports SLI, but lacks onboard Firewire.
Cost: $84 (6/10/2007) [Comparison shop for this item]
Processor
AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+ Retail (Socket AM2)
The Budget Box gets a swift bump from the previous X2 3600+ as dual core prices continue to decrease.
The Intel Core 2 Duo E4300 is very good but not yet price-competitive; for overclockers, it should be a particularly good choice if the price goes down. The Athlon64 X2 3600+ gets the price down to a level that even the Budget Box can manage, and it offers a far better performance/power ratio than the current low-end Intel Pentium D chips. The Core 2 Duo E4400 and Athlon64 X2 4000+ are only a little more expensive than their lowest-end counterparts in their respective line-ups and are also good choices for those who can afford a little more.
We go with the retail box Athlon 64 X2 3800+ CPU because the cost of a bare CPU with an aftermarket heatsink/fan does not give a significant price advantage, plus you get a longer warranty with the retail-boxed CPU.
Cost: $79.99 (6/10/2007) [Comparison shop for this item]
RAM
1GB DDR2-667
RAM is important and inexpensive enough that 1GB is the bare minimum now, particularly with Windows Vista now available. 2GB of memory would be very nice for Vista, but squeezing that into the Budget Box is difficult. We use DDR2 memory to match our motherboard and chipset requirements.
Cost: $39.50 (6/10/2007) [Comparison shop for this item]
Video
eVGA GeForce 7900GS
Budget DirectX 10 parts in the form of the nVidia Geforce 8500 and 8600-series have arrived to disappointing performance, much like their brethren from ATI. Until the release of more DX10-capable video games makes DX10-capable parts look good, sticking with DX9-capable parts looks to be the smarter move. The NVIDIA Geforce 7900GS is an excellent value at this price point, at least until DX10 titles show up, and ATI's Radeon X1950Pro is also very competitive.
Look closely when shopping for video cards, as core clock speeds and memory clock speeds may differ from model to model for the same chip, making a straight apples-to-apples comparison difficult. We're recommending the eVGA GeForce 7900GS, with 256MB of RAM, a 500 MHz GPU clock speed, and a 1380MHz effective RAM clock speed. With a power draw of less than +5A on the +12v line, power consumption is relatively modest, too.
Cost: $149.99 (6/10/2007) [Comparison shop for this item]
Sound
None?onboard
Onboard sound is adequate for most purposes. If you pick a motherboard like this month's recommendation that has a digital-out and feed it to speakers that accept a digital signal, then you have even less to worry about.
Cost: n/a
Communications
Modem?none
The adoption of high-speed Internet access by today's enthusiasts means the modem recommendation can be removed from the Budget Box. We used to recommend the US Robotics 2976/2977 and 5610A/5610B, but we're not up to date on current products.
Cost: n/a
Network card?none (on-board)
The motherboard has integrated Ethernet on board, which is adequate for the Budget Box.
Cost: n/a
Hard drive
Western Digital Caviar SE16 250GB SATA
Hard drives are all very close in price in the lower-capacity ranges, and when sales and rebates are considered, buyers may find that drives as large as 500GB are affordable. The sweet spot for price/capacity seems to shift upwards every few months, from 250GB to 320GB to 400GB or 500GB now. While the value is nice, we stay with a slightly smaller drive in the Budget Box because we do not need the space. Considering "after rebate" prices in the System Guide is a bit too unpredictable for us, so do not expect them here?but be aware that they are an excellent way to save money and get a bigger drive in the process.
The fundamental goal is to buy what you need, but those seeking the lowest noise level should look at Samsung Spinpoint drives. Seagate drives have five-year warranties, which makes them our choice in the Budget Box when the price is equal.
The Western Digital Caviar SE16 is an excellent performer with a 16MB cache and a three-year warranty.
Cost: $66.50 (6/10/2007) [Comparison shop for this item]
Optical drive
DVD-RW/CD-RW: Pioneer DVD-112D
The new Pioneer DVR-112D is our choice in the Budget Box, a welcome 18X refresh of the 16X DVR-111D. Other solid choices include the Lite-On LH-20A1S/LH-20A1P, as well as the Samsung SH-183L and the Lite-On SH-16A7S. Plextor also remains a favorite for a few dedicated fans.
Separate DVD-ROM and CD-RW drives, or separate DVD-ROM and DVD±RW drives, are preferred by many, but DVD-RW drives now are cheap enough that just buying two makes unless there's some specific need the most sense to us.
The Pioneer DVR-112D supports DVD reads and writes up to 18x, CD reads up to 40x, and a PATA interface. The SATA version, the DVR-212D, is a few bucks more for those who prefer the neatness of SATA cabling; performance is otherwise identical.
Cost: $35.99 (6/10/2007) [Comparison shop for this item]
Case
Antec SLK1650B
Finding previous Budget Box chassis favorites has grown difficult, so we continue with the well-known Antec SLK1650. A quality chassis with a very good power supply, the SLK1650B is an excellent chassis for the money. Previous suggestions such as the In-Win C720T are still very viable solutions to save a bit of money, although sourcing them is somewhat more difficult, and the power supply isn't quite as nice as the 350W Smartpower in the SLK1650/SLK1650B.
Those who choose to go the microATX route will find that case selection is somewhat more limited than standard ATX, although many home theater PCs use that form factor. The Antec NSK3300 is an excellent choice for those with a little more money to spend. For those who want the extra expansion of an ATX chassis, good choices include the Antec NSK4400 and its siblings, the Coolermaster Centurion 5, Lian-Li PC1000, and many more.
Cost: $60.99 (6/10/2007) [Comparison shop for this item]
Speakers
Logitech X-230
Speakers have been fairly boring for quite a while in the Budget Box. The Logitech X-230 and Logitech Z-3 are passable, albeit bland, choices in this category. In this price range, a good pair of headphones might make more sense.
Cambridge Soundworks, Altec Lansing, Swan, and others have suitable setups as well. If better speakers are desired, all of these companies have good choices, including the Logitech X-620 and Z-560.
Cost: $29 (6/10/2007) [Comparison shop for this item]
Monitor
Hanns-G JW-199DPB 19" LCD
LCDs have become cheap enough that even a 19" model fits in the Budget Box. It's a TN-film based panel so viewing angles are not the greatest, but for a low-cost LCD, it suits our needs very well. CRTs are being replaced by wide-gamut LCDs that match or better the color gamut that CRTs offer, but W-CCFL and LED backlights needed to do this currently command premium prices, pricing such LCDs far out of the range of the Budget Box.
Stepping down to a smaller 17" LCD such as the Acer AL1706AB saves a few bucks, while a cheap 20" LCD such as the Samsung 204B is a substantial bit more.
We choose the HannsG 19" in no small part due to its 300 cd/m2 brightness and its 5ms response time.
Cost: $169.99 (6/10/2007) [Comparison shop for this item]
Mouse
Microsoft Wheel Mouse Optical
Optical mice are downright cheap. Buy what you like, be it Microsoft, Logitech, or anything else. If you crave more buttons, higher-end mice from most companies including Microsoft and Logitech are readily available for more money. Logitech's new MX1000 is one very nice, very expensive example of a high-end mouse.
Cost: $11.09 (6/10/2007) [Comparison shop for this item]
Keyboard
Logitech Keyboard
If you find it comfortable, then buy it. Logitech, Microsoft, and other name-brand units are all pretty decent. Keep in mind the important nature of personal preference in this decision, and the fact that your keyboard is a critical piece of your interface to your computer.
Cost: $14.95 (6/10/2007) [Comparison shop for this item]
Total price: $741.99, not including shipping and handling (6/10/2007, no OS)
Recommended operating systems
Vista is upon us, but we're not quite ready to recommend it. The biggest issue at this point is driver immaturity. As a result, we suggest you stick with Windows XP for the time being. If you want to live on the cutting edge, Vista will run very smoothly on this box; just be prepared for the possibility of minor issues with the drivers.
Windows XP Home
Windows 2000 with a lot more glitz and a few improvements. Gaming support is further improved over Windows 2000, and while some quirks due to the high level of feature integration remain, XP Home is a choice many want to make. When buying with new hardware, OEM versions should be affordable. Keep this in mind, particularly if Windows XP Professional isn't too much more.
Cost: $69.95 (6/10/2007) [Comparison shop for this item]
Windows XP Media Center Edition
Windows MCE 2005 is another alternative for the Budget Box. The much-improved hardware support over MCE 2004, support for multiple tuners, and the familiar Windows interface greatly simplify setup for many. Easy rollout by OEMs has also furthered the spread of Windows MCE and the ubiquitous Windows interface.
Cost: $84.99 (6/10/2007) [Comparison shop for this item]
Windows XP Professional x64 Edition
64-bit extensions arrive to Windows XP. Take advantage of performance improvements with programs that support 64-bit instructions enabled on the Athlon64, Opteron, Core 2 Duo, Xeon, and Pentium 4. When deciding between Windows XP in the (conventional) 32-bit and the newer x64 edition, keep in mind that hardware drivers for x64 edition are less mature and often slower as a result.
Cost: $133.89 (6/10/2007) [Comparison shop for this item]
Linux
Any computer enthusiast worth his salt boots more than one OS. Linux is a wonderful choice for the budget box: powerful, cool, and cheap. Take your pick of distributions and go nuts! Fedora Core, Ubuntu, Debian, Slackware, and Mandrake, try Linuxiso.org or Cheapbytes.com, or others.
Cost: Free
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
11. June 2007 @ 08:29 |
Link to this message
|
MPlayer (2007-06-10)
Author: Mplayer
Date: 2007-06-11
Size: 24.1 Mb
License: Freeware
This is a full package of MPlayer for Windows and the MPUI front-end. This package contains everything you´ll need in one single download!
Key features are:
The award-winning OpenSource Movie Player available for Windows now
Plays almost every Audio/Video format that exists today, try out yourself!
Intuitive user-interface, no need to run MPlayer from the command-line
Full multi-language and Unicode support, more than 20 languages included
Self-contained "all-in-one" install wizard (made with NSIS)
More than 192 Video- und 85 Audiocodecs supported natively! (full list)
Latest optimized MPlayer builds by Celtic Druid for best performance
Improved version of MPUI front-end by MuldeR, compiled with Delphi7 Professional
Binary codec Package for MPlayer included, no need to download/install manually
Optimized builds for: Athlon-XP, Athlon-64, Pentium-4 (Prescott), Pemtium-M
Also includes a ´Generic´ build with Runtime CPU Detection
about 17 MB total download size for the complete package
DOWNLOAD HERE
http://www.majorgeeks.com/MPlayer_d5663.html
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
11. June 2007 @ 08:33 |
Link to this message
|
AIMFix 1.6.61.938
Author: Jay Loden
Date: 2007-06-11
Size: 336 Kb
License: Freeware
AIMFix was created to remove all known AIM viruses in one consolidated removal tool. It is designed to end the virus processes, delete the files, and remove registry keys created by the virus.
DOWNLOAD HERE
http://www.majorgeeks.com/AIMFix_d4348.html
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
11. June 2007 @ 09:22 |
Link to this message
|
Ad-Aware 2007 7.0.1.2
Warp2Search News Ad-Aware 2007 Free remains the most popular anti-spyware product for computer users around the world, with nearly one million downloads every week. Our free anti-spyware version provides you with advanced protection against spyware that secretly attaches and takes control of your computer, resulting in aggressive advertising pop-ups, sluggish computer activity, even identity theft through stolen bank details, passwords, and credit card account numbers.
What's New in Ad-Aware 2007 Free?
# Redesigned Engine ? Benefit from superior program flexibility and more accurate scanning methods with all-new program architecture.
# Improved Code Sequence Identification (CSI) Technology ? Boost your privacy protection with precise detection of embedded malware, including known and emerging threats.
# Incremental Definition File Updates ? Save precious time and resources with smaller update files resulting in faster download times.
# TrackSweep - Control privacy by erasing tracks left behind while surfing the Web on Internet Explorer, Firefox, and Opera, with one easy click.
# Multiple Browser Support ? Choose Internet Explorer, Firefox, or Opera with expanded browser support.
# New Straightforward User Interface ? Effortlessly maneuver the complexities of malware detection and removal with our new user-friendly interface.
Ad-Aware 2007 7.0.1.2
LINK FOR DOWNLOAD
http://www.lavasoftusa.com/products/sele...3ece0971e4de342
http://www.lavasoftusa.com/
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 11. June 2007 @ 09:23
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
11. June 2007 @ 09:27 |
Link to this message
|
WiFi mics used in exam cheats
p2pnet.net news:- National college entrance exams in China are "make or break," spawning a string of cheating scandals, says state news agency Xinhua.
Now three people have been arrested for running a money making conspiracy involving wireless mics, it says.
"Police in Jiutai, in the northeastern province of Jilin, became suspicious when a mini-bus remained parked outside a school hosting the exam Thursday, Xinhua said.
"Inside, they found three people, 'two of them staring at a computer screen and talking into a walkie-talkie'. A student in the examination hall used a wireless microphone to read out the questions and received the answers from the van, Xinhua quoted their confessions as saying."
The three charged the student 12,000 yuan ($1,500), it says.
Exam papers are considered state secrets before the tests, says Xinhua, adding:
Authorities in neighboring Liaoning province spent 100 million yuan fitting over 8,000 exam halls with metal detectors and cameras to prevent tech-savvy students from cheating on national university entrance tests.
Police had found some 42 pairs of so-called "cheating shoes" with transmitting and reception ability, selling for about 2,000 yuan each, in a flat in Shenyang, the provincial capital, state media said Thursday, adding that they - along with "cheating wallets" and hats - had proved popular this year.
Three men in the southwestern province of Sichuan received suspended jail terms of 8-12 months last year for using pinhole cameras to send out images of the entrance exam papers to be worked out by "hired guns" for 19 students.
http://p2pnet.net/story/12474
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
11. June 2007 @ 14:47 |
Link to this message
|
|
How to see hidden files in Windows
Windows 2000
To enable the viewing of Hidden files follow these steps:
1. Close all programs so that you are at your desktop.
2. Double-click on the My Computer icon.
3. Select the Tools menu and click Folder Options.
4. After the new window appears select the View tab.
5. Under the Hidden files and folders section select the radio button labeled Show hidden files and folders.
6. Remove the checkmark from the checkbox labeled Hide file extensions for known file types.
7. Remove the checkmark from the checkbox labeled Hide protected operating system files.
8. Press the Apply button and then the OK button and shutdown My Computer.
9. Now your computer is configured to show all hidden files.
Windows XP and Windows 2003
To enable the viewing of Hidden files follow these steps:
1. Close all programs so that you are at your desktop.
2. Double-click on the My Computer icon.
3. Select the Tools menu and click Folder Options.
4. After the new window appears select the View tab.
5. Put a checkmark in the checkbox labeled Display the contents of system folders.
6. Under the Hidden files and folders section select the radio button labeled Show hidden files and folders.
7. Remove the checkmark from the checkbox labeled Hide file extensions for known file types.
8. Remove the checkmark from the checkbox labeled Hide protected operating system files.
9. Press the Apply button and then the OK button and shutdown My Computer.
10. Now your computer is configured to show all hidden files.
Windows Vista
To enable the viewing of Hidden files follow these steps:
1. Close all programs so that you are at your desktop.
2. Click on the Start button. This is the small round button with the Windows flag in the lower left corner.
3. Click on the Control Panel menu option.
4. When the control panel opens you can either be in Classic View or Control Panel Home view:
If you are in the Classic View do the following:
1. Double-click on the Folder Options icon.
2. Click on the View tab.
3. Go to step 5.
If you are in the Control Panel Home view do the following:
1. Click on the Appearance and Personalization link .
2. Click on Show Hidden Files or Folders.
3. Go to step 5.
5. Under the Hidden files and folders section select the radio button labeled Show hidden files and folders.
6. Remove the checkmark from the checkbox labeled Hide extensions for known file types.
7. Remove the checkmark from the checkbox labeled Hide protected operating system files.
8. Press the Apply button and then the OK button and shutdown My Computer.
9. Now Windows Vista is configured to show all hidden files.
Conclusion
Now that you know how to see all hidden files on your computer, malicious programs such as viruses, spyware, and hijackers will no longer be able to hide their presence from you or people helping you.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
12. June 2007 @ 04:28 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Who in Their Right Mind Would Run Safari on Windows?
06.12.07 | 2:00 AM
It makes perfect sense for Apple to release its Safari web browser for Windows, but the question is: What right-thinking Windows user would want it?
Steve Jobs' unexpected announcement Monday that the public beta of Safari 3 runs on Windows left the crowd at Apple's Worldwide Developers Conference in San Francisco murmuring its approval.
But the initiative seems to rely on a domino theory fueled by infatuation. Apple is hoping there are Windows users so in love with their iPods and iTunes that they will also download Safari. Then they'll fall in love with that, and the next thing you know they'll be down at the Apple Store fishing for their credit cards.
There's only one problem with that scenario -- Safari sucks. A lot of Mac users won't run the browser (I'm one of them), so why would anyone run it on Windows?
On my Mac, Safari is buggy and unreliable. It's always crashing, and it doesn't offer basic features like remembering all the tabs you have open after you quit (or more likely, after it crashes). Until now, it didn't even warn you before closing multiple tabs, although the new version of Safari fixes this.
Firefox is getting a little bloated these days, but it's a better browser.
For Windows users, the browser market is already far too crowded -- who needs anything other than Internet Explorer or Firefox? Safari is one browser too many.
A couple of Windows users I've talked to would happily ditch Firefox for Internet Explorer if only IE supported some of Mozilla browser's handy plug-ins. Wired magazine contributing editor Fred Vogelstein for one would love to run Explorer. (Vogelstein is also the only person in the world who runs Windows XP full time on his new MacBook).
Safari doesn't support plug-ins (at least plug-ins that aren't hacks) and it certainly doesn't benefit from a thriving community of plug-in developers the way Firefox does.
These days, browsers are taken for granted -- you can't even give this stuff away.
But I'm sure there will be millions of downloads by looky-loos curious to see if Safari is better. One developer at WWDC suggested Safari might be more secure than IE if it doesn't run ActiveX controls (ActiveX is a source of much malicious code).
Of course, Apple has good reasons to offer Safari to Windows users. The company has little to lose. It may gain new users, and there's no danger that Microsoft will try to crush Apple like it crushed Netscape -- the browser wars are over. Plus, Apple is more likely to take market share from Firefox than IE.
Apple is also throwing a bone to iPhone developers. If developers create software for the highly anticipated gadget using Jobs' "sweet" Safari development plan, they get to run those apps in Safari on Windows for free. Maybe this is part of Apple's plan to create a plug-in platform for Safari -- by offering it up as a big platform for developers. And maybe in a year or so Safari will be a better browser because of it.
Perhaps most importantly, Apple is turning WebKit -- the engine that drives Safari -- into a big open-source development project to rival Mozilla.
One developer at WWDC said many open-source programmers are very excited about Apple's support for WebKit. Unlike Mozilla, which has only a nonprofit foundation to back its efforts, two big companies are pushing WebKit: Apple and Nokia, which is using the technology for some of its smartphones.
So Apple has every reason to dangle Safari in front of Windows users. But right now, I can't see any good reasons for Windows users to take the bait.
http://www.wired.com/gadgets/mac/comment...ac_0612[/quote]
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
12. June 2007 @ 05:05 |
Link to this message
|
Best Buy lawyer falsifies e-mails, memo
By Nate Anderson | Published: June 11, 2007 - 11:03PM CT
Best Buy can now add "faking two e-mails and a memo" to its list of legal problems. A lawyer working for the company confessed his indiscretion, potentially putting Best Buy on the hook for millions of dollars in damages in a class-action lawsuit that was filed back in 2003.
The plaintiffs claim that Best Buy routinely signed new computer owners up for MSN trials without permission. When the trial period expired, customer credit cards were charged. Microsoft is also a party to the case, as the plaintiffs allege that it failed to act after receiving numerous complaints.
All pretty standard class-action stuff, so far. But one of the company's main attorneys in the case, Timothy Block, has just thrown a spanner into the works by admitting that he falsified two e-mails and one internal memo, according to the Associated Press. The changes were (one suspects) designed to make Best Buy look better, though few details are available. Block claims that the alterations were made solely at his discretion, and that no one at his firm or at Best Buy was aware of what he had done.
Faking evidence doesn't sit well with judges, and the judge in this case might simply issue a default judgment against Best Buy. If that happens, the company would owe millions of dollars to the affected class, and Microsoft would be off the hook.
The bizarre story comes shortly after allegations that Best Buy used a high-tech version of the old bait and switch to cheat consumers out of discounts. The company was also sued a year ago by Winternals, a software developer that accused Best Buy's Geek Squad of using an expensive piece of diagnostic software across the country without bothering to pay for a license.
Take together, the three cases suggest that there's something in the water at the company's Twin Cities headquarters... and that consumers might not want to drink from the Best Buy fountain. But the company has done at least one thing for the customer?it has worked to eliminate the dreaded mail-in rebate. That's small consolation, though, for customers who believe that Best Buy intentionally ripped them off.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/200...mails-memo.html
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
12. June 2007 @ 05:12 |
Link to this message
|
Weedshare and DRM
p2pnet.net news:- "At OpenBusiness I read WeedShare is officially dead," posts Marco Raaphorst in his blog over in Holland.
In an email, Raaphorst says he'd "never liked WeedShare because of the DRM" and kindly translated his article into English >>>>>>>>>
With its demise, an end comes to another new business model for musicians and fans. But I was expecting this to happen because there were a couple rather nasty disadvantages when using that service.
How WeedShare worked
A track of WeedShare, WMW fileformat (Windows Media Audio), could play 3 times for free. After the third time, a sales-order demand was send to the listener. A track you've bought you could also resell to friends, and you received percentage as a first purchaser, as well as a percentage which went to the musician/link and WeedShare. This system had the advantage that is was suitable for p2p systems. Passing on music ensured that more people would buy this music.
But it didn't work well
The principal disadvantage of WeedShare was the fileformat: WMA (a DRM-ed version). This could only play on certain media-players, particularly Windows Media Player. My favorite foobar2000, as a result, won't play those DRM-crippled files. Also, you couldn't set up these files for your iPod---- couldn't play them on systems like Apple, Unix or Linux. `Therefore: Windows only.
DRM, Digital Rights management, was used to track how often the song was played on a system and whether or it was properly licensed. A quote from OpenBusiness:
"Some time ago, Microsoft released a new version of the Windows Media Player, and it no longer worked with WeedShare files as it had in the past. Suddenly, WeedShare didn't work, and if Microsoft didn't change things, they couldn't work."
This is exactly my criticism concerning DRM: one day all your music files can become unplayable. A file bought at the iTunes can't be played in most other non-Apple software. Also, DJs have a huge problem because most music software (NI Traktor, Ableton Live) can't play these files.
And what if film-makers want to add this music to a movie? They can't. DRM is not at all remix ready.
WeedShare cooperated closely with Microsoft, but that produced zero guarantees. One simple Windows Media Player update, and all was lost. The same thing can happen to any DRM file format, and we'll see a lot more examples of this in the future.
Copy Control on CDs was also a mistake. Instead of an enhancement, it broke the format and most CDs became unplayable on car-systems, or very high-end equipment.
Today we live in a sharing economy. Sharing is an essential part of how we work together. It's also a friends thing: sharing.
Now with the internet, our friends are all connected and it's much easier than ever before to share files with each other.
In Holland, it's legal to share and download music files for private use. The music industry thinks this is an evil act and they want to 'protect' it. But instead of adding DRM to files, the music industry simply should become more creative.
Napster was a smart idea. p2p and bittorrent protocols are great inventions. The Pirate Bay is a creative bunch of people.
There are new opportunities for selling music, but it'll probably mean radical change. Nothing will be the same again. Downloads and file sharing are here to stay. We'll discover new music because our friends tell us about it. Word of mouth, the most powerful thing in the world and also: free marketing. These are the things the music industry needs to focus on, but I'm afraid there's a long way to go. A long way which simply will offer new business models build by smart music fans or bands which are offering direct downloads to fans.
In short: the music industry has to become more creative. DRM is not the answer, it is the bullet with which the music industry has shot itself in the foot. And that's a painful mistake. CD-control, Apple's iTunes and also WeedShare has shown the world that DRM is not a solution, it's the worst way to kill your own business.
(Thanks, Marco)
http://p2pnet.net/story/12482
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
12. June 2007 @ 05:31 |
Link to this message
|
Cheaper than a dentist: Photoshop teeth-whitening filter
Posted by Stephen Shankland
Austin, Texas-based Image Trends plans to release new Photoshop plug-ins Tuesday that automate two common tasks for cosmetic retouching of digital photos: whitening teeth and removing skin glare.
go here to see more
http://www.imagetrendsinc.com/
The company's PearlyWhites and ShineOff plug-ins cost $49.95 each. The plug-ins work on Windows, but Mac OS X versions will be available later.
The filters can operate in a batch mode, allowing Photoshop users to edit large groups of images in bulk. The PearlyWhites plug-in doesn't need to be told where teeth are located--the often-laborious selection process. Instead, it applies its changes to white areas that it finds surrounded by flesh tones, said Michael Conley, vice president of marketing and sales.
The company also plans to release the Mac OS X version of a plug-in called Fisheye-Hemi that converts the distorted view of a fish-eye lens into a perspective more familiar to human eyes. That plug-in costs $29.95.
Image Trends was formed from the core members of the former Applied Science Fiction Group, now Kodak's Austin Development Center, the company said.
http://news.com.com/8301-10784_3-9728345...g=2547-1_3-0-20
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
12. June 2007 @ 06:35 |
Link to this message
|
The RIAA's Beaverton bust: II
p2pnet.net news view:- Yesterday, p2pnet ran a story centering on the corporate music industry use of local police in a raid on two flea markets in Oregon, and I've had several emails mirroring some of the comments in the Slashdot post on this. They say, in effect, Why shouldn't the police be acting against counterfeiters?
As I posted in a Slashdot response, I didn't say, and I'm not saying, that shouldn't be happening. Rather, I was trying to underscore the completely distorted emphasis on what is, after all, a minor event in the scheme of things.
Thanks to an ongoing PR blitzkrieg in the mainstream media, duping music in any way, shape or form is coming to be regarded as a major crime and police forces are being suborned by the entertainment industries to act as copyright cops and in the process, they're being stopped from dealing with far more important incidents.
Counterfeiters are lumped together with file sharers under the now-generic term 'piracy,' which makes it much easier for the Big 4 - EMI (Britain), Vivendi Universal (France), Sony BMG (Japan and Germany) and Warner Music (US) - to drag innocent men, women and children into court, accusing them of being thieves and criminals of the same ilk as the counterfeiters. But there's no similarity whatsoever. And not one of these approximately 30,000 cases has yet been decided, and no one has yet been found guilty of the non-existent crime of file sharing, or anything else..
Sharing means exactly that. Sharing. No one has deprived of something he she used to own, no money has changed hands and it's often argued that file sharing is, in fact, an invaluable form of viral marketing.
The Big 4 use their so-called trade organisations such as the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America), BPI (British Phonographic Industry), IFPI (International Federation of Phonographic Industry) or, CRIA (Canadian Recording Industry Association of America), to name but a few, to suggest files share shared equal sales lost, and that sharing is exactly the same as someone walking into a retail outlet and shoplifting ------- or duplicating a disc and selling it in a flea market.
The story I refer to, published in The Oregonian, says police grabbed, "50,000 items worth about $758,000," the implication being this was all music industry 'product'.
But also mentioned, though only in passing, are, "knockoff designer purses, sunglasses and clothing, and counterfeit brand-name toys".
The owners of these items would no doubt love to see the police giving the same kind of undivided attention to their products as the CDs and DVDs. But that isn't happening.
The story says Beaverton police, "got a tip about counterfeit items being sold at a Beaverton market in December, and the investigation led them to the Hillsboro flea markets".
No prizes for guessing where the tip came from, and about "20 recording and movie industry investigators" arrived from California to "help" police (who numbered in their dozens, according to the story) identify counterfeit items.
Beaverton's population in 2006 was, says the Wikipedia, estimated at 84,270. So you'd hardly call it a major city. Nonetheless, the movie and music cartels assigned 20, TWENTY!, 'investigators' with "dozens of police officers" taking part in the raid?
The report says the CDs were going for $4.50 each, and the DVDs for between $4 and $12. But let's deduct, say, $10,000 for the sunglasses, etc. That leaves $748,000 for 50,000 (or so) DVDs and CDs, which also means the $4.50 to $12.00 claim doesn't compute.
Meanwhile, the issue isn't whether or not counterfeiting is illegal, or if police should be arresting counterfeiters: it's the disproportionate amount of time and manpower being allocated when it's generally acknowledge that enforcement authorities everywhere are already finding it hard enough to cope with serious problems, including shortages of personnel and other resources.
It's piracy, all right. But the pirates are the entertainment cartels.
http://p2pnet.net/story/12483
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
12. June 2007 @ 08:40 |
Link to this message
|
June 12, 2007 6:13 AM PDT
Security researchers: Safari for Windows not so secure
Within hours of Apple's public release of the beta for Safari 3.0 for Windows, three security researchers independently found holes within the new browser. Researcher Aviv Raff highlighted in a blog post the company's product statement, that reads: "Apple's engineers designed Safari to be secure from day one." Raff found a vulnerability, a memory corruption error that could allow an attacker to insert malicious code on a Windows machine, within three minutes using publicly available fuzzing tools.
Security researcher David Maynor, posting on his Errata security blog, said he was also able to generate a memory corruption error "in no time." By the end of the day, he was able to generate a total of six bugs--four producing a denial of service (crash), and two capable of executing remote code.
Veteran security researcher Thor Larholm wrote in his blog that he found a "0day" vulnerability in Safari within two hours. The flaw exists in how Safari handles URL protocols within Windows, causing a denial of service (crash). Larholm has published an exploit to demonstrate the flaw.
All of the vulnerabilities were found on Windows machines; none of the researchers could say whether these flaws also existed on the Mac OS.
http://news.com.com/8301-10784_3-9728500-7.html
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
12. June 2007 @ 10:15 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Bulletin Information
====================
The security bulletins for this month are as follows, in order of
severity:
Critical Security Bulletins
===========================
MS07-031 - Vulnerability in the Windows Schannel Security Package
Could Allow Remote Code Execution (935840)
- Affected Software:
- Microsoft Windows 2000 Service Pack 4
- Windows XP Service Pack 2
- Windows XP Professional x64 Edition
- Windows XP Professional x64 Edition Service Pack 2
- Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 1
- Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 2
- Windows Server 2003 with SP1 for Itanium-based Systems
- Windows Server 2003 with SP2 for Itanium-based Systems
- Windows Server 2003 x64 Edition
- Windows Server 2003 x64 Edition Service Pack 2
- Impact: Remote Code Execution
- Version Number: 1.0
MS07-033 - Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer (933566)
- Affected Software:
- Microsoft Windows 2000 Service Pack 4
- Windows XP Service Pack 2
- Windows XP Professional x64 Edition
- Windows XP Professional x64 Edition Service Pack 2
- Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 1
- Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 2
- Windows Server 2003 with SP1 for Itanium-based Systems
- Windows Server 2003 with SP2 for Itanium-based Systems
- Windows Server 2003 x64 Edition
- Windows Server 2003 x64 Edition Service Pack 2
- Windows Vista
- Windows Vista x64 Edition
- Impact: Remote Code Execution
- Version Number: 1.0
MS07-034 - Cumulative Security Update for Outlook Express and
Windows Mail (929123)
- Affected Software:
- Windows XP Service Pack 2
- Windows XP Professional x64 Edition
- Windows XP Professional x64 Edition Service Pack 2
- Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 1
- Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 2
- Windows Server 2003 with SP1 for Itanium-based Systems
- Windows Server 2003 with SP2 for Itanium-based Systems
- Windows Server 2003 x64 Edition
- Windows Server 2003 x64 Edition Service Pack 2
- Windows Vista
- Windows Vista x64 Edition
- Impact: Remote Code Execution
- Version Number: 1.0
MS07-035 - Vulnerability in Win32 API Could Allow Remote Code
Execution (935839)
- Affected Software:
- Microsoft Windows 2000 Service Pack 4
- Windows XP Service Pack 2
- Windows XP Professional x64 Edition
- Windows XP Professional x64 Edition Service Pack 2
- Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 1
- Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 2
- Windows Server 2003 with SP1 for Itanium-based Systems
- Windows Server 2003 with SP2 for Itanium-based Systems
- Windows Server 2003 x64 Edition
- Windows Server 2003 x64 Edition Service Pack 2
- Impact: Remote Code Execution
- Version Number: 1.0
Important Security Bulletins
============================
MS07-030 - Vulnerabilities in Microsoft Visio Could Allow Remote
Code Execution (927051)
- Affected Software:
- Microsoft Visio 2002 Service Pack 2
- Microsoft Visio 2003 Service Pack 2
- Impact: Remote Code Execution
- Version Number: 1.0
Moderate Security Bulletins
===========================
MS07-032 - Vulnerability in Windows Vista Could Allow Information
Disclosure (931213)
- Affected Software:
- Windows Vista
- Windows Vista x64 Edition
- Impact: Information Disclosure
- Version Number: 1.0
Other Information
=================
Microsoft Windows Malicious Software Removal Tool:
==================================================
Microsoft has released an updated version of the Microsoft Windows
Malicious Software Removal Tool on Windows Update, Microsoft Update,
Windows Server Update Services, and the Download Center.
Note that this tool is not distributed using
Software Update Services (SUS).
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
14. June 2007 @ 05:07 |
Link to this message
|
TorrentSpy ruling a 'weapon of mass discovery'
news analysis It was a pro-copyright ruling that stunned nearly everyone dealing with the issue of online piracy.
In a decision reported late Friday by CNET News.com, a federal judge in Los Angeles found that a computer server's RAM, or random-access memory, is a tangible document that can be stored and must be turned over in a lawsuit.
If allowed to stand, the groundbreaking ruling may mean that anyone defending themselves in a civil suit could be required to turn over information in their computer's RAM hardware, which could force companies and individuals to store vast amounts of data, say technology experts. Roaming the Web anonymously was already nearly impossible. This ruling, which brings up serious privacy issues, could make it a lot harder.
"I think that people's fears about a potential invasion of privacy are quite warranted," said Ken Withers, director of judicial education at The Sedona Conference, an independent research group. "The fear is that we're putting in the hands of private citizens and particularly well-financed corporations the same tools that heretofore were exclusively in the hands of criminal prosecutors, but without the sort of safeguards that criminal prosecutors have to meet, such as applying for search warrants."
"I think that people's fears about a potential invasion of privacy are quite warranted."
--Ken Withers,
The Sedona Conference
U.S. Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Chooljian issued the decision while presiding over a court fight between the film industry and TorrentSpy, which is accused of copyright infringement in a lawsuit filed last year by the Motion Picture Association of America. Following her decision, Chooljian ordered TorrentSpy to begin logging user information and allowed the company to mask the Internet Protocol addresses belonging to visitors of the Web site. TorrentSpy must then turn the data over to the MPAA. The judge stayed the order pending an appeal, which the company filed on Tuesday. It's not clear when the appeal will be heard.
The question now, of course, is whether Chooljian's ruling with hold up legally or technically. From a legal standpoint, Withers said he feared the judge's decision may mean a "tremendous expansion" of the scope of discovery in civil litigation. The trend in the courts lately has been to create what Withers called "weapons of mass discovery." Discovery is the legal process by which lawyers obtain documents and other materials to help defend their case.
He also said that the judge's order for a defendant (TorrentSpy) to create logs of user activity so they can be turned over to a plaintiff (MPAA) is unprecedented.
"There's never been a requirement that (defendants) must create documents that they wouldn't ordinarily maintain for the purpose of satisfying some (plaintiff's) discovery requests," said Withers.
But on the technical side, Dean McCarron, principle analyst at Mercury Research, said the judge erred by defining volatile computer memory as "electronically stored information."
RAM is a computer's ephemeral and temporary memory that helps it access data quickly. Think of RAM as the yellow post-it notes that people keep to remind themselves of tasks. Once completed, the note is tossed out. Data in a computer's hard drive is stored permanently and is more like filing documents away in a cabinet.
"RAM is the working storage of a computer and designed to be impermanent," McCarron said. "Potentially your RAM is being modified up to several billions of times a second. The judge's order simply reveals to me a lack of technical understanding."
A "tap" can be installed in a server, McCarron offered. But that means keeping a running log of IP addresses and other information. A tap would also require a company to store enormous amounts of data, an expensive process, he said.
But lawyers who represent copyright holders cheered Chooljian's decision.
"Unfortunately for TorrentSpy, Judge Chooljian's decision may herald the end of an era," Richard Charnley, a Los Angeles-based attorney, said in a statement. "The process, if affirmed, will expose TorrentSpy's viewer-users and, in turn, will allow the MPAA to close another avenue of intellectual property abuse."
Lauren Nguyen, an MPAA attorney, maintains that because TorrentSpy is allowed to redact IP addresses, nobody's privacy is in jeopardy. "The user privacy argument is simply a red herring," Nguyen said. She also said that the judge "broke no new ground in the case." The courts have long considered computer RAM as "electronically stored information," she said.
To understand the significance of the decision, one must consider that many Web sites promise to keep users' information private. Some, like TorrentSpy, do this by switching off their servers' logging function, which typically records visitors' IP addresses as well as their activity on the site.
While protecting its users' privacy, TorrentSpy also makes it easier for those who download pirated material to work in the shadows, MPAA's attorneys argued. The MPAA has estimated that the illegal downloading of copyright movies costs the six largest U.S. studios more than $2 billion annually.
To prove that TorrentSpy was making it easier to share files, the studios told Chooljian that it was necessary that they obtain records of user activity. They convinced her that the only way to do this was to obtain the data from RAM.
Ultimately, pulling user information off a server's RAM might be a bigger privacy problem than it's worth, said one file sharer, who asked to remain anonymous.
"To imagine my information being disseminated without my written or verbal consent is unnerving," she said. "Then again, if I'm doing something I know is illegal, can I protest?"
http://news.com.com/TorrentSpy%20ruling%...-0-20&subj=news
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
14. June 2007 @ 05:19 |
Link to this message
|
free,Download the Microsoft Windows Home Server Release Candidate
By Michael Calore EmailJune 13, 2007 | 4:34:28 PMCategories: Windows
Windowshomeserver Microsoft's centralized home media server is ready for testing. Go to the Windows Home Server page on Microsoft's Connect site
HERE
http://connect.microsoft.com/WindowsHomeServer
and complete the quick survey. Then, you'll be sent a link enabling you to download the server software for free. Test it out by setting it up on a spare machine in your house. You will also need a Live.com login to participate. Kind of a bummer that Microsoft is making us jump through so many hoops to test its software, but hey -- it's free!
The Windows Home Server runs on your LAN and hosts all of your music, movies and digital media, making the files instantly accessible to all of the computers in your home. Here's what we said when it was unveiled in January, 2007: "It can be used to manage data stored within user accounts, shared folders, and external storage devices. More than a simple automated NAS backup, it also sports Zune connectivity, and there's a web component that lets you log in and access your data from any connected computer on the planet."
http://blog.wired.com/monkeybites/2007/06/download_the_mi.html
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
14. June 2007 @ 06:03 |
Link to this message
|
'Windows' Safari dodgy: researchers
p2pnet.net news:- A mere day after Apple announced a new version of its Safari browser would work happily in a Windows environment, security researchers have uncovered almost 20 bugs.
Aviv Raff, David Maynor and Thor Larholm all reported flaws, says the IDG News Service.
"Maynor alone said he'd discovered six bugs, including two that could be used to run unauthorized software on a victim's PC," says the story, going on:
"Safari 3.0 is getting more attention because, for the first time, Apple has made a Windows version of the software available. Now the software can be downloaded by a much larger group of testers.
And Tom Ferris, an expert at finding Apple flaws, said his 'fuzzer' vulnerability tester nailed 10 holes in the browser in only five minutes.
He had "harsh words for Apple's security team," says IDG, to wit, "That's horrible, and just goes to show that they took no initiative to fuzz their own software."
"Apple engineers designed Safari to be secure from day one," said Apple in a statement Raff called "pathetic."
However, the beta software, "is being held to the standard that a Gold Master copy should," the story quotes Mac user Matthew Baker as saying. "It just seems to me that some people... feel some sort of pleasure in reporting issues with Apple's software."
Apple's claims that the people are safer with Safari have indeed made it irresistible to hackers looking to make their bones in a very public way.
"You see a lot of people running OS X saying it?s so secure and frankly Microsoft is putting more work into security than Apple has," said Dragos Ruiu, winner of the recent CanSecWest Hack a Mac contest.
Meanwhile, why would Microsoft users want to use Safari in the first place? They, " may need to run Safari to get access to some synchronization features with iPhone and the desktop," says InformationWeek.
"Moreover, even a sliver of Windows market share will give Safari a huge boost in the raw numbers of its installed base, which would make Safari a more attractive platform for developers and could increase the range of applications available for the iPhone."
Slashdot Slashdot it!
Also See:
work happily - Apple's new Safari for Windows, June 11, 2007
IDG News Service - Windows Safari Bug-Hunters Boost Tally, June 13, 2007
finding Apple flaws - Apple trouble: crash and burn, April 24, 2006
Hack a Mac - QuickTime hole could be 'real bad', April 27, 2007
InformationWeek - Windows Users Don't Care About Safari, June 12, 2007
http://p2pnet.net/story/12503
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
14. June 2007 @ 06:12 |
Link to this message
|
PDF IMAGE EXTRACTION WIZARD..........
PDF Image Extraction Wizard is a free utility that allows you to easily extract bitmap images from PDF documents and store them as individual image files. .....(free).....GO THERE!
http://www.rlvision.com/pdfwiz/about.asp
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
14. June 2007 @ 06:14 |
Link to this message
|
PSIPHON..........
Allows citizens in uncensored countries to provide unfettered access to the Net through their home computers to friends and family members who live behind firewalls of states that censor.....(free).....GO THERE!
http://psiphon.civisec.org/
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
14. June 2007 @ 06:16 |
Link to this message
|
OSSWIN PROJECT..........Huge listing of open source software for Windows .....(free).....GO THERE!
http://osswin.sourceforge.net/
EXAMPLES
* Audio editing tools
* Business Software
* CAD software
* Calendar Software
* CD Writing
* Compression/ZIP
* Databases
* Desktop Environments
* Dictionaries
* Drivers/Hardware
* Educational
* Emulators
* Encyclopedia
* Filesharing
* FTP clients
* firewall & NAT
* File Systems
* Games
* Graphics
* Instant Messaging
* Internet Voice chat
* IRC clients
* Mail & News
* Media Players (audio)
* Media Players (video)
* Media Players (codecs)
* MC303 utilities
* Networking tools
* NTP clients
* Office tools
* Operating Systems
* PostScript viewers
* Programming
* Remote access
* Sciences and Math
* Security, Privacy, Protection,...
* Server software
* SCP (SecureCoPy) clients
* Stream Downloaders
* Text editors
* Utilities
* Video capture/processing
* VJ Software
* Web browsers
* Webcam
* Web editors
* Webgrabbers
* X-servers
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 14. June 2007 @ 06:21
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
14. June 2007 @ 06:52 |
Link to this message
|
iPhone buyers MUST have iTunes
p2pnet.net news:- The iPhone is nigh, slated to hit on- and offline stores on June 29.
But guess what?
With the suggestion that non-Mac iPhone users may need Safari under Windows to get some synchronization features in the background, in one of the most blatant examples of corporate hard-sell ever seen, Apple insists anyone buying an iPhone will also be compelled to open an iTunes account.
Whether they want one or not.
Says the Apple site, innocently:
To set up your iPhone, you'll need an account with Apple's iTunes Store. If you already have an iTunes account, make sure you know your account name and password. If you don't have an account, you should set one up now to save time later. To set up an account, launch iTunes, select the iTunes Store, and click the Sign In button in the upper right corner of iTunes. Sign in and you're ready to go.
That's no lever. That's a crowbar.
http://p2pnet.net/story/12505
|
|
