If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Seeking a concise Canon CHDK (Firmware hack) site?
Walter Banks wrote:
Clearly you have not read what I posted about CHDK. FUD, lies and twisted quartertruths. It is a combination of interesting IP and reverse engineering and unlicensed use of Canon IP. And you are a two-headed dog posing as an alien from Mars. No, I won't provide proof, I'll just repeat it like a broken record. After all, that is your method. See Message-ID: and how you answered to it. I have been as sincere about the positive things I have said about CHDK as I have about the ethics of how some of CHDK was created. You are also strangely silent on Message-ID: which tells me you know no copyright violation happened, even though you claim they did. Justification no matter what does not alter the ethics. Lying, like you do, is unethical --- what IS your justification? -Wolfgang |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Seeking a concise Canon CHDK (Firmware hack) site?
Seeking a concise Canon CHDK (Firmware hack) site?; On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 07:13:54 -0400, Walter Banks wrote: Doug Bashford wrote: On Thu, 09 Jun 2011, Bruce wrote: Meanwhile, Walter tilts at windmills. ;-) Everybody makes mistakes, but only real men admit that. Now that Walter has had reality patiently explained to him, (logic argument if he were both ethical and intellectually self-honest, he would admit his mistake. Clearly you have not read what I posted about CHDK. I have. Are you confusing what yer feeling "what I know, GD it!" with your actual arguments? It is a combination of interesting IP and reverse engineering and unlicensed use of Canon IP. You keep repeating those unsupported claims in the face of persuavive counter arguments. You are not making an argument (a point). (for example, Are those claims premises?) Minor points on the side: Since nobody copied a camera nor it's OS, how is it reverse engineering? Macmillan Dictionary -reverse engineering - definition 1. the activity of examining and copying a product developed by another company in order to make your own product Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary: when a company copies the product of another company by looking carefully at how it is made http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dict...se-engineering Oh BTW: ..."In 2009, the EU Computer Program Directive was superseded and the directive now states: "..."circumstances may exist when such a reproduction of the code and translation of its form are indispensable to obtain the necessary infor*mation to achieve the interoperability of an indepen*dently created program with other programs. It has therefore to be considered that, in these limited circum*stances only, performance of the acts of reproduction and translation by or on behalf of a person having a right to use a copy of the program is legitimate and compatible with fair practice and must therefore be deemed not to require the authorisation of the right*holder. An objective of this exception is to make it possible to connect all components of a computer system, including those of different manufacturers, so that they can work together." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse...European_Union ....since you argued ethics, not legality.... As I argued elsewhere, US laws strongly favor corporations over consumers. I too prefer arguing ethics over law. I have been as sincere about the positive things I have said about CHDK as I have about the ethics of how some of CHDK was created. Nobody doubts the power of your feelings. Justification no matter what does not alter the ethics. We agree. However the judge who biburcates every case would never be called wise. So again, I miss your point...again you are failing to make an argument. Wild guess: your powerful feelings are well founded, they just don't apply here. --Doug The insane twist the facts to fit their world view. The rational change their world view to fit the facts. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Seeking a concise Canon CHDK (Firmware hack) site?
Seeking a concise Canon CHDK (Firmware hack) site?; On Thu, 16 Jun 2011, Bruce wrote: Doug Bashford wrote: As I said above; I can't help but think that the pages of obsolete material are there for more than apathetic neglect, but for a feeling, or tradition, or some such that I can't put my finger on. I've suggested "sentimental value" as a possibility. I would suggest it is a result not of apathy, but anarchy, compounded by the fact that the first language of so many of the contributors is not English. Couple that with a desire not to offend anyone by removing their particular contribution, and the result is an uncontrolled mess. You should demand a full and complete refund. ;-) Laughing! I'm far more dastardly than that. I'm suggesting change! [evil laugh prolly from a dugeon] not English. Couple that with a desire not to offend anyone Sure, not being mind readers we guess, could be. Anarchy, in the sense of no-direction, a free-for-all, -that's how I see it, but I've never explored the foundational guidlines...if they even exist. The solution could be as simple as Wikipedia's, post guidline signs in the common areas. Signs should say: 1) clean up your own mess. Evolve your pages, not patch them. 2) Date each change and comment as well as giving build numbers etc. 3) Aim at the newbies who see walls of inpenetrable jargon (such as build numbers and authors) 4) The normal desire not to offend anyone needs to be gently discouraged in the name of quality product, which needs to rise as the new goal. Again, see how Wikipedia does this (mostly with signs, but also essays, how-to, templates, discussion, whatever...that only the movers and doers see). They need to reorganize. I'm sure a pure forum format worked perfectly for the first year or three. But now we see it's weakness, failure of orderly evolution. They need what Wikipedia has, a discussion area and a *product area*. The product is the finished products, the working software, duh. They prolly also need archive areas for the obsolete stuff for 1) old software/cameras and 2) old discussions etc. The way to implement that is do not attempt to repair what's there, leave it alone, abandon it. Now start a new section called 2011 or DIGIC 4 or some such natural and obvious (but naturally changing) boundary. Put in those signs and guidlines and *encourage* deletion, particularly from the original authors. It's not rocket science. If you don't ask quality from your team, guess what you get? If a teenager isn't directed to clean up his room, ...what do we *KNOW* will happen? Entropy is a law of nature, of thermodynamics. Physical Law. Physics. Reality. It says: without direction and energy: chaos grows. The insane twist the facts to fit their world view. The rational change their world view to fit the facts. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Seeking a concise Canon CHDK (Firmware hack) site?
Doug Bashford wrote:
Seeking a concise Canon CHDK (Firmware hack) site?; On Sun, 5 Jun 2011 18:08:52 +0200, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote: SMS wrote: It takes time to maintain documentation, and few people will do it for free. Hogwash. Wikipedia proves that. Wikipedia is documentation, CHDK is a camera and the Earth is a disk. A thousand popular freewares prove that. Name 100 which run on at least half as many different platforms as CHDK and offer at least half the features CHDK offers. The exceptions are one-man operations such as Irfanview, yet even there one can zap in and get it within minutes. Irfanview isn't complicated, CHDK is. Doug B. just volunteered. Ha. As noted, I can't even register to log on to setepontos. The wiki is at http://chdk.wikia.com and needs no registering. By now they owe me ~6 verify reg emails. Look into your spam folder. Or try entering your real email address. Normally I *NEVER* register, **** that intrusive ****. Verifying emails aren't intrusive. -Wolfgang |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Seeking a concise Canon CHDK (Firmware hack) site?
Doug Bashford wrote:
On Sun, 5 Jun, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote: SMS wrote: It takes time to maintain documentation, and few people will do it for free. Doug B. just volunteered. -Wolfgang As I said above; I can't help Why? but think that the pages of obsolete material are there for more than apathetic neglect, but for a feeling, or tradition, or some such that I can't put my finger on. More doing, less talking. Fix that feeling, install the Wikipedia attitude there, problem solved. Sure, reverse gravity and we can walk to the moon. What's odd here is that nobody here has denied the mess, yet everybody acts like (ironically) that's not a problem, or that's inevitable, or that's normal. Well, maybe it is, and you are just creating problems where none are. ...as if it has no cause, or the problem is intractable. ...or that since I dare to notice, *I*, me a newbie, should fix it! I am not bothered by it, so why should *I* fix it, or even care? With THAT kind of attitude how could there *NOT* be that problem? Yes, the problem is failure to take responsibility, duh, it's time to stop the fingerpointing and for YOU the experts to do some entropy repair. You, Doug, are an idiot. How come *we* are to be CHDK experts and how come *we* have to pre-chew and pre-digest everything for you? You're shirking all your responsibilities, but you dare telling us ours? Isn't that a case of the pot calling the polar bear black? Let's talk fixing. Let's see you *do* fixing. Talking is cheap. Page after page I'm told At the top of the Wiki you are told your camera isn't supported. It's in Beta. If you cannot deal with that, get the **** out of the steam. [Doug being too stupid to deal with a forum] So the solution is a surgical bulldozer!!?? Mass, pinpoint deletion? Or is it reorganization? No, it's you starting to learn how to deal with a forum. Here's one idea. How about a new section for DIGIC 4? ...at least that defines an era. http://chdk.wikia.com There's a zillion possibilities. But that's what we called in the military: a command decision. Who's in charge? Again, you don't understand, grasshopper. Even though you have been told. I think you are trolling. -Wolfgang |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Seeking a concise Canon CHDK (Firmware hack) site?
Doug Bashford wrote:
On Tue, 7 Jun 2011, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote: The observed behaviour of camera manufacturers is that they are not in the least positive towards CHDK (though not hostile enough to make CHDK completely impossible), nor do they seem inclined to add features like motion detection, scripting et al to their new cameras. Yup. It's the microsoft definition of KISS: Keep It comicbook Simple for Stupid. That's us. That may be you, but it's certainly not me. While the market has proven that MS KISS works, CHDK fills a void, a nich market. But in my opinion, that market can be widely expanded at little cost, I think it must be shrinking now due to sloppy, undisciplined, aimlessly wandering haphazard documentation. You are not talking about http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK_User_Manual but about a forum for a certain beta software. [2] Our analog-signal TV harddisk recorder has the tendency to stop receiving when you switch channels and with a recording time (advertized) of up to 400 hours, has only *8* slots for timer recordings. Yes, you can do weekly repeats and Mo-Fr repeats --- but you cannot give a name to the recordings before they are recorded and naming recordings is a major PITA due to the interface (switch through the whole alphabet letter by letter, digit by digit, special char by special char (you can switch between upper and lower case though) --- and don't press the buttons on the remote control too fast. Never heard of an on-screen keyboard, have they?) No chance for me to fix that issue, even if I had all the time in the world. Manf' HATE buttons, yup? It's not a case of buttons, it's a case of stupid use cases and usability. Immediately an onscreen keyboard with cursors and/or T9 comes to mind. -Wolfgang |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Seeking a concise Canon CHDK (Firmware hack) site?
In rec.photo.equipment.35mm Bruce wrote:
: Doug Bashford wrote: : As I said above; : I can't help but think that the pages of obsolete : material are there for more than apathetic : neglect, but for a feeling, or tradition, or : some such that I can't put my finger on. : I've suggested "sentimental value" as a possibility. : I would suggest it is a result not of apathy, but anarchy, compounded : by the fact that the first language of so many of the contributors is : not English. Couple that with a desire not to offend anyone by : removing their particular contribution, and the result is an : uncontrolled mess. : You should demand a full and complete refund. ;-) I've been using the hack tools for over a year now and never had a problem making sense of the website or the information there. -- ------------------- Keep working dumbo needs the money |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Seeking a concise Canon CHDK (Firmware hack) site?
In rec.photo.equipment.35mm Walter Banks wrote:
: DanP wrote: : All of the third party code sets that I know about have appropriate code : licensing. It is primarily a myth about hacked ECU code magically providing : dramatic performance improvements. Getting rid of RPM limiters in hacked : code generally would be an invitation for broken valve springs and bearing : failures in street cars. It is a self correcting problem : : Walter Banks : Byte Craft Limited : : But the user can use non licensed codes, right? Losing the warranty of : course. : No car manufacturer would object to it, only advise against it. : : It is like any third party add on. Third parties develop original work or : a combination of licensed and original IP Owners can use the software : it at their own risk. : CHDK is mostly Canon's unlicensed IP and that is where the issues : start to come into it. There is original IP in CHDK that could have : been turned into an interesting product in my opinion. There is other : third party code written to support Canon camera's licensed through : Canon's SDK. I'm sorry for jumping late but what unlicensed Canon IP is chdk using? -- ------------------- Keep working dumbo needs the money |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Is Canon's CHDK Hack Dead? | Crash! | Digital Photography | 47 | April 25th 11 07:13 PM |
CHDK firmware on a Canon Powershot a720 | sobriquet | Digital Photography | 6 | March 9th 08 06:25 AM |
CHDK Successfully Ported to Canon G7 Firmware v1.00g | KevenGaston | Digital Photography | 62 | October 22nd 07 02:42 PM |
300D firmware hack | R | Digital Photography | 25 | December 13th 04 12:17 AM |