Re: Analog Hole Bill Would Require Secret Tech No One Can Examine
- From: John Larkin <jjlarkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 19:37:03 -0800
On 23 Jan 2006 17:49:41 -0800, Winfield Hill
<Winfield_member@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>The upcoming Analog Hole bill would require secret, expensive
>technology that no one can examine, and or talk about if they
>have, even after paying a $10,000 fee, according to techdirt,
>http://techdirt.com/articles/20060123/1352234_F.shtml
They'll never make it mandatory for general-purpose sar adc chips to
search for watermarks. And you can always make an audio-quality [1]
delta-sigma in an FPGA. But why do you think it important to be able
to bootleg someone else's intellectual property? If you don't like the
product, don't buy it.
John
[1] whatever that means.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Analog Hole Bill Would Require Secret Tech No One Can Examine
- From: Kevin G. Rhoads
- Re: Analog Hole Bill Would Require Secret Tech No One Can Examine
- From: Paul Hovnanian P.E.
- Re: Analog Hole Bill Would Require Secret Tech No One Can Examine
- From: YD
- Re: Analog Hole Bill Would Require Secret Tech No One Can Examine
- From: Ian Stirling
- Re: Analog Hole Bill Would Require Secret Tech No One Can Examine
- From: cs_posting
- Re: Analog Hole Bill Would Require Secret Tech No One Can Examine
- References:
- Analog Hole Bill Would Require Secret Tech No One Can Examine
- From: Winfield Hill
- Analog Hole Bill Would Require Secret Tech No One Can Examine
- Prev by Date: Re: Favorite electronics movies
- Next by Date: Re: Favorite electronics movies
- Previous by thread: Analog Hole Bill Would Require Secret Tech No One Can Examine
- Next by thread: Re: Analog Hole Bill Would Require Secret Tech No One Can Examine
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|