| Wednesday,
January 31, 2001 Dear Dr.
Pournelle,
There is an interview with Lawrence Lessig at
oreilly net on copyright law where he says "the recording industry
has succeeded in its objective, which ... is to guarantee that no venture
capitalist invests money in new modes of distribution unless Hollywood
signs off. " Interesting interview at http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/p2p/2001/01/30/lessig.html
Kit Case
Thanks. I don't think they've succeeded, but
perhaps. You will note that the VCR and VHS didn't destroy either the
movie or the video tape industries.
From: Steve Setzer <setzer@backfence.net>
Subject: Thompson and the Apple DVD writer
Jerry,
I suspect Robert Bruce Thompson is reading the same
article I did at http://cryptome.org/jg-wwwcp.htm
. If so, I think he's misinterpreted it.
That article does not assert that Apple users will
be unable to record their own digital video. Quite the opposite. It
asserts that Apple users will be unable to record copyrighted video even
if they have a legal right to under "fair use" and similar
doctrines; it also asserts that Apple users will be unable to copy-protect
their own homemade discs.
According to the Apple FAQs and Fact Sheets on the
new machines and their iDVD software:
1) You can import digital video from a DV camcorder
to the computer via FireWire.
2) DV video is handled by QuickTime; it's just
another QuickTime digital format.
3) The new Apple iDVD software takes QuickTime files
and encodes them into the MPEG-2 format used by DVD players, and then
writes out a "DVD-General" disc that can be played in any
consumer or computer DVD drive.
4) The drive can also write out 4.7 GB DVD-R discs
usable only in computers.
So, yes you can digitally record your own digital
movies in full quality. But, you can't add the special codes that keep
others from duplicating them (because Apple's drive writes "DVD-General",
not "DVD-Professional" discs), and you can't duplicate DVD-Professional
discs (because they do contain the special codes and Apple's software
abides by those codes).
Steve Setzer
Interesting. Thanks. I suspect we'll have more on
this subject.
And then there's this:
Dear Dr. Pournelle,
This is a lot of quotes from Linus Torvalds. The
columnist warns they are out of context, and just meant to show one part
of the man. My own favorite, given with zero context, was,"It's
entirely untested, but it looks good and compiles. Ship it!"
http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/opinions/2980/1/
regards,
William L. Jones
Fascinating. I know how he feels...
You need to review this:
http://help.juno.com/privacy/agreement.html
Is this what Internet Service Providers are coming
to? The downfall of the internet is on the horizon.
Pay special attention to section 2.5
Ken Kashmarek Eldridge Iowa
Holy catfish!
Hello
Would you or any of your readers know what "pad.esi"
is? I use W2000 workstation. It is a huge file, 134 Mb. I have been
unsuccessful in opening or viewing it. Quickview does not know what it is
and it is not listed in W2000's extensive listing of file types. I was
wondering if it was safe to delete it. Thanks,
Peter Durand [pldurand@home.com]
There is no such file on any of my systems, which
is about all I know. I suggest you rename it pad.esj or some such and see
if anything interesting happens. I doubt it will prevent your system from
running at all...
I clicked on the link to see your techweb broadcast and it didn't work.
The URL it tried was (http://www.jerrypournelle.com/audio.byte.com)
My Best,
James Messick
Well, Front Page did that. Stupid. I think I have
fixed it finally. About time... Now it should do http://audio.byte.com
. My mistake was in not putting the http:// in the address; without that,
Frint Pagfe decided to supply one. Or the web did. Anyway this ought to
fix it.
BLOOOODY HELL I managed to type it wrong again.
There is something evil about this, and about the web interfaces that make
you squint at little tiny letters on big screens. NOW IT SHOULD BE ALL
RIGHT.
Jerry-
I was reading an article posted on your website
titled Telenko On SDI (Jun 23,2000); while I find myself in basic
agreement with the message of the article, I did find a gross inaccuracy
that I felt a need to correct. Perhaps you can pass this on to Mr. Telenko?
His statement was:
>Only 3 of 7 "combat ready"
Minuteman were successfully launched from active silos in early 1980s
>realistic tests ordered by then Defense Secretary Casper Weinburger -
realistic compared to the >standard phony tests from Vanderberg AFB
silos of carefully reworked Minuteman ICBM's.
As a point of reference, let me state that I am a
former Minuteman and Peacekeeper Maintenance Team Chief, Master
Instructor, and Launch Super, and was an AFSPACECOM Technician Of The
Quarter. I was stationed at Grand Forks AFB, ND and Vandenberg AFB, CA. My
credentials can be viewed at http://members.tripod.com/Rocketman_NM/mypages/netres.html
. That said, let me proceed to the facts concerning Mr. Telenko's load of
excrement.
1. There was only 1 "combat ready" launch
of a Minuteman Missile from an operational base. Test launches are all
conducted at Complex 31 or 32 at Cape Canaveral AFB (discontinued since
1970) or Vandenberg AFB; some testing has also been done from Wallops
Island, Va. The SINGLE ops test was conducted at Ellsworth AFB, March 1,
1965. The launch used a modified Minuteman that had the fuel cut to
provide a 7 second thrust, and was code-named "Project Longlife".
2. The "realistic" tests that are done at
operational bases are called Simulated Electrical Launch of Minuteman (SELM),
and are performed yearly, at every base. A selected squadron is
deconfigured of all explosive charges, and simulator boxes are connected
to all cable terminations where the missile would recieve a signal. Launch
is then commanded normally and the monitored signals are verified (by
analysis only) as having "launched" the missile. These tests
were known as "Giant Pace" in the 80's period he refers to, and
were almost all a complete success; the few failures that occurred were
largely in the MONITORING EQUIPMENT. There were some on-site failures, but
a far smaller percentage than his narrative relates, and actually below
the statistical failure rate for any electromechanical system (and a
better success rate than NASA enjoyed at the time).
3. As for "phony tests from Vanderberg AFB
silos of carefully reworked Minuteman ICBM's", this statement
illuminates me to the possibility that the author is using biased
conjecture (or less politely, out-right lies) to support his viewpoint.
That's a shame, as his point is a good one, and it's a pity he spoils it
(and his veracity) by adding in fake data. Technicians both at the the
base that pulls the Minuteman Missile and at Vandenberg go to great
lengths to ensure everything is copied in configuration matching the
operational site - often to the point of ridiculousness. And the missiles
are never "carefully reworked" - they are pulled from the silo
in a single assembly (minus the warhead) and transported to base, placed
into a shipping container (which leaves about 2 feet of space around the
sides of the missile), then transferred straight into an emplacer vehicle
(called a transporter-erector) at Vandenberg. It is then installed
directly into the test silo. The ONLY hardware/software differences
between a Vandenberg launch and an operational base have to do with 3
systems: special protective hardware for the silo itself, that enables the
silo to be quickly refurbished after launch; Command/Destruct packages
that allow the Missile to be destroyed remotely if it veers out of
control; and a special instrumentation warhead, which replaces the real
one. ALL other aspects of the test launch are identical.
I have worked for various periods of time in every
aspect of Minuteman and Peacekeeper ICBM's from programming targets for
real warheads to recovering a silo after a launch. Nowhere, at any point
in a very full career did I ever see ANY of the situation that Mr. Telenko
falsely alludes to. We often hoped for failures, as Missileers everywhere
often get fed up with utilizing 60's vintage equipment and support
hardware patched together a hundred times because there were constant
budget cuts in military spending that wouldn't allow purchase of new
equipment. But instead, I and my co-workers were continually amazed at the
success rate that the Minuteman system enjoys, despite it's age and lack
of support.
It would have forced a public outcry and a much
needed replacement of the system to have had the ratings Mr. Telenko
suggests - we were never that lucky. Instead, hundreds of Missileers
toiled 16-18 hours shifts, driving daily routes over 200 miles, working in
heat indexes of 130F, or chill factors of -130F. I myself was frostbitten
twice, once in a howling snowstorm that had a chillfactor of -108F. And
our hard work kept that aging, decrepit system working at near 100%
capacity - and won the Cold War. Mr. Telenko insults Missileers everywhere
with his atrocious lies; and destroys the integrity of what would have
been a very good article. His point was made fine - without the added
bovine matter.
Sincerely, Brian Britt
P.S. - Love your books, Mr. Pournelle - keep
writing!!
Thank you for setting that record straight. I was
involved in Minuteman Command and Control design a very long time ago, and
my lab at the Boeing Development Center was nearly whacked by a silo
opening test that used a bit more explosive than needed.... In those days
one of the problems was the security access door to the silo; it was made
by a safe company to bank vault specs, and that's fine for bank vaults,
but the Montana winters were a bit harder on them, and we had to drill in
with armed USAF Security troops standing by... But all that was a
while ago. As was sitting in one of those things when a Klaxon went off.
It was always a drill but you never knew that.... Emergency War
Orders is a pretty frightening message. I am not unhappy to see us stand
down from some of that, but in our prayers and thankgivings we ought to
remember the crews who sat in those holes through the last 20 years of the
Seventy Years War.
Thanks again. For the letter, and for having been
there.
TOP
|
CLICK HERE for
a Special Request. 
