Tag Archives: julia

Директивата за авторско право: ход на ревизията: да се действа сега

Post Syndicated from nellyo original https://nellyo.wordpress.com/2018/05/26/copyright-5/

Ново развитие в ревизията на авторското право в ЕС – става ясно от  съобщенията на българското председателство, участници в ревизията и Юлия Реда – защото тя имаше много ясен възглед какво иска да се промени в правната рамка (общ режим на изключенията, актуализиране – за да имаме правна рамка, адекватна на технологичното развитие) – и сега следи ангажирано законодателния процес.

Правителствата на държавите от ЕС  са приели позиция  относно реформата на авторските права  без съществени промени по чл.11 (новото право за издателите)  и чл.13 (филтрите на входа), проектът е на сайта на Реда,  Politico дава измененията, засягащи правото на издателите, в цвят.

Сега Парламентът трябва да ги спре, пише Реда.

 Сега имате шанса да окажете влияние – шанс, който ще изчезне след две години, когато всички “изведнъж” ще се сблъскат с предизвикателството да се  внедряват филтри   и link tax.  Експертите почти единодушно се съгласяват, че проектът за реформата на авторското право е наистина лош.

Update: Member State governments have just adopted their position on #copyright, with no significant changes to the #CensorshipMachines and #LinkTax provisions. It is now up to Parliament to stop them and #FixCopyright. https://t.co/1JwNvQn24n pic.twitter.com/KAgqV3YYG1

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Две графики от сайта на Реда – за двата текста,  против които се събира подкрепа (вж и преподавателите) – за  отношението по държави и по партии в ЕП:

 

 

Pirate IPTV Blocking Case is No Slam Dunk Says Federal Court Judge

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/pirate-iptv-blocking-case-is-no-slam-dunk-says-federal-court-judge-180502/

Last year, Hong Kong-based broadcaster Television Broadcasts Limited (TVB) applied for a blocking injunction against several unauthorized IPTV services.

Under the Copyright Act, the broadcaster asked the Federal Court to order ISPs including Telstra, Optus, Vocus, and TPG plus their subsidiaries to block access to seven Android-based services named as A1, BlueTV, EVPAD, FunTV, MoonBox, Unblock, and hTV5.

Unlike torrent site and streaming portal blocks granted earlier, it soon became clear that this case would present unique difficulties. TVB not only wants Internet locations (URLs, domains, IP addresses) related to the technical operation of the services blocked, but also hosting services akin to Google Play and Apple’s App Store that host the app.

Furthermore, it is far from clear whether China-focused live programming is eligible for copyright protection in Australia. If China had been a party to the 1961 Rome Convention for the Protection of Performers, Producers of Phonograms and Broadcasting Organisations, it would receive protection. As it stands, it does not.

That causes complications in respect of Section 115a of the Copyright Act which allows rightsholders to apply for an injunction to have “overseas online locations” blocked if they facilitate access to copyrighted content. Furthermore, the section requires that the “primary purpose” of the location is to infringe copyrights recognized in Australia. If it does not, then there’s no blocking option available.

“If most of what is occurring here is a reproduction of broadcasts that are not protected by copyright, then the primary purpose is not to facilitate copyright infringement,” Justice Nicholas said in April.

This morning TVB returned to Federal Court for a scheduled hearing. The ISPs were a no-show again, leaving the broadcaster’s legal team to battle it out with Justice Nicholas alone. According to details published by ComputerWorld, he isn’t making it easy for the overseas company.

The Judge put it to TVB that “the purpose of this system [the set-top boxes] is to make available a broadcast that’s not copyright protected in this country, in this country,” he said.

“If 10 per cent of the content was infringing content, how could you say the primary purpose is infringing copyright?” the Judge asked.

But despite the Judge’s reservations, TVB believes that the pirate IPTV services clearly infringe its rights, since alongside live programming, the devices also reproduce TVB movies which do receive protection in Australia. However, the company is also getting creative in an effort to sidestep the ‘live TV’ conundrum.

TVB counsel Julian Cooke told the Court that live TVB broadcasts are first reproduced on foreign servers from where they are communicated to set-top devices in Australia with a delay of between one and four minutes. This is a common feature of all pirate IPTV services which potentially calls into question the nature of the ‘live’ broadcasts. The same servers also carry recorded content too, he argued.

“Because the way the system is set up, it compounds itself … in a number of instances, a particular domain name, which we refer to as the portal target domain name, allows a communication path not just to live TV, but it’s also the communication path to other applications such as replay and video on demand,” Cooke said, as quoted by ZDNet.

Cooke told the Court that he wasn’t sure whether the threshold for “primary purpose” was set at 50% of infringing content but noted that the majority of the content available through the boxes is infringing and the nature of the servers is even more pronounced.

“It compounds the submission that the primary purpose of the online location which is the facilitating server is to facilitate the infringement of copyright using that communication path,” he said.

As TF predicted in our earlier coverage, TVB today got creative by highlighting other content that it does receive copyright protection for in Australia. Previously in the UK, the Premier League successfully stated that it owns copyright in the logos presented in a live broadcast.

This morning, Cooke told the court that TVB “literary works” – scripts used on news shows and subtitling services – receive copyright protection in Australia so urged the Court to consider the full package.

“If one had concerns about live TV, one shouldn’t based on the analysis we’ve done … if one adds that live TV infringements together with video on demand together with replay, there could be no doubt that the primary purpose of the online locations is to infringe copyright,” he said.

Due to the apparent complexity of the case, Justice Nicholas reserved his decision, telling TVB that his ruling could take a couple of months after receiving his “close attention.”

Last week, Village Roadshow and several major Hollywood studios won a blocking injunction against a different pirate IPTV service. HD Subs Plus delivers around 600 live premium channels plus hundreds of movies on demand, but the service will now be blocked by ISPs across Australia.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN reviews, discounts, offers and coupons.

#FixCopyright #SaveTheLink #CensorshipMachines

Post Syndicated from nellyo original https://nellyo.wordpress.com/2018/04/28/fixcopyright-savethelink-censorshipmachines/

На 26 април 2018 г. учени от 25 водещи изследователски института за интелектуална собственост в Европа  публикуваха отворено писмо, изразяващо сериозни опасения относно  предложената директива за авторско  право.

Според авторите след балансиран проектодоклад на докладчика на Европейския парламент Тереза ​​Комодини (Доклад Comodini,  10 март 2017 г.) неотдавнашни текстове от новия докладчик Axel Voss и българското председателство  на Съвета на Европейският съюз изглежда водят към компромис, който не отговаря на целите на директивата за подобряване на избора, достъпа и справедливостта в цифровата среда.

Има научен консенсус
– че предложеното изключение   по чл. 3 няма да постигне целта си да стимулира иновациите и научните изследвания, ако се ограничи до определени организации,
– че предложенията за право на  издателите по чл. 11 ще благоприятстват по-скоро интересите на издателските интереси в пресата, отколкото иновативната журналистика,
– и че предложенията за чл. 13 застрашават ползата от  Директивата за електронната търговия (2000/31 / ЕО), която споделя отговорността за прилагането между носителите на авторски права и доставчиците на услуги.

169 представители на академичните среди предупреждават за недобре замислените планове за въвеждането на ново право на интелектуална собственост (сродно право за издателите). Те напомнят, че широк спектър от заинтересовани групи вече представи становища, че Директивата за авторското право в настоящия си вид няма да бъде в обществен интерес.

Близо 150 неправителствени организации също се противопоставят на актуалния проект. Според тях предопределено е, че транспониране на  законодателство в този вид ще е  кошмар. Същото се отнася и до проверката на съответствието на директивата с  Хартата на основните права на ЕС и Бернската конвенция. Отворено писмо

По стечение на обстоятелствата името на България  ще остане свързано с тази директива. Ако това ни интересува.

*

На 27 април 2018 г. (вчера) по план в COREPER се обсъжда  предоставяне на мандат за преговори с Европейския парламент по Директивата за авторското право.  

 (текстът)

Kакво е решил COREPER? според Юлия Реда не е даден мандат:

Ревизията на авторското право в ЕС: отлагане на гласуването в ЕП

Post Syndicated from nellyo original https://nellyo.wordpress.com/2018/04/10/censorship_machine/

Отлагане в Европейския парламент на гласуването за Директивата за авторското право, която се обсъжда в момента – включително censorship machine  (член13 от проекта).

Гласуването в парламентарната комисия по правни въпроси JURI  е насрочено за 20-21 юни, Юлия Реда съобщава в Туитър:

И една нова публикация в The Guardian, според която измененията на правната рамка създават риск за свободата на изразяване и за свободата на достъпа до информация.

 

[$] Jupyter: notebooks for education and collaboration

Post Syndicated from jake original https://lwn.net/Articles/746386/rss

The popular interpreted language Python shares a mode of interaction
with many other languages, from Lisp to APL to Julia: the REPL (read-eval-print-loop)
allows the user to experiment with and explore their code, while maintaining a
workspace of global variables and functions. This is in contrast with
languages such as Fortran and C, which must be compiled and run as complete
programs (a mode of operation available to the REPL-enabled languages as
well). But using a REPL is a solitary task; one can write a program to
share based on their explorations, but the REPL session itself not easily
shareable. So REPLs have gotten more sophisticated over time, evolving
into shareable notebooks, such as what IPython, and its more recent
descendant, Jupyter, have. Here we look at Jupyter: its history,
notebooks, and how it enables better collaboration in languages well beyond
its Python roots.

[$] Tools for porting drivers

Post Syndicated from jake original https://lwn.net/Articles/739578/rss

Out-of-tree drivers are a maintenance headache, since customers may want to
use them in newer kernels.
But even those drivers that get
merged into the mainline may need to be backported at times. Coccinelle developer Julia Lawall
introduced the audience at Open Source Summit Europe to some new tools
that can help make both forward-porting and backporting drivers easier.

NSA Document Outlining Russian Attempts to Hack Voter Rolls

Post Syndicated from Bruce Schneier original https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2017/06/nsa_document_ou.html

This week brought new public evidence about Russian interference in the 2016 election. On Monday, the Intercept published a top-secret National Security Agency document describing Russian hacking attempts against the US election system. While the attacks seem more exploratory than operational ­– and there’s no evidence that they had any actual effect ­– they further illustrate the real threats and vulnerabilities facing our elections, and they point to solutions.

The document describes how the GRU, Russia’s military intelligence agency, attacked a company called VR Systems that, according to its website, provides software to manage voter rolls in eight states. The August 2016 attack was successful, and the attackers used the information they stole from the company’s network to launch targeted attacks against 122 local election officials on October 27, 12 days before the election.

That is where the NSA’s analysis ends. We don’t know whether those 122 targeted attacks were successful, or what their effects were if so. We don’t know whether other election software companies besides VR Systems were targeted, or what the GRU’s overall plan was — if it had one. Certainly, there are ways to disrupt voting by interfering with the voter registration process or voter rolls. But there was no indication on Election Day that people found their names removed from the system, or their address changed, or anything else that would have had an effect — anywhere in the country, let alone in the eight states where VR Systems is deployed. (There were Election Day problems with the voting rolls in Durham, NC ­– one of the states that VR Systems supports ­– but they seem like conventional errors and not malicious action.)

And 12 days before the election (with early voting already well underway in many jurisdictions) seems far too late to start an operation like that. That is why these attacks feel exploratory to me, rather than part of an operational attack. The Russians were seeing how far they could get, and keeping those accesses in their pocket for potential future use.

Presumably, this document was intended for the Justice Department, including the FBI, which would be the proper agency to continue looking into these hacks. We don’t know what happened next, if anything. VR Systems isn’t commenting, and the names of the local election officials targeted did not appear in the NSA document.

So while this document isn’t much of a smoking gun, it’s yet more evidence of widespread Russian attempts to interfere last year.

The document was, allegedly, sent to the Intercept anonymously. An NSA contractor, Reality Leigh Winner, was arrested Saturday and charged with mishandling classified information. The speed with which the government identified her serves as a caution to anyone wanting to leak official US secrets.

The Intercept sent a scan of the document to another source during its reporting. That scan showed a crease in the original document, which implied that someone had printed the document and then carried it out of some secure location. The second source, according to the FBI’s affidavit against Winner, passed it on to the NSA. From there, NSA investigators were able to look at their records and determine that only six people had printed out the document. (The government may also have been able to track the printout through secret dots that identified the printer.) Winner was the only one of those six who had been in e-mail contact with the Intercept. It is unclear whether the e-mail evidence was from Winner’s NSA account or her personal account, but in either case, it’s incredibly sloppy tradecraft.

With President Trump’s election, the issue of Russian interference in last year’s campaign has become highly politicized. Reports like the one from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in January have been criticized by partisan supporters of the White House. It’s interesting that this document was reported by the Intercept, which has been historically skeptical about claims of Russian interference. (I was quoted in their story, and they showed me a copy of the NSA document before it was published.) The leaker was even praised by WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who up until now has been traditionally critical of allegations of Russian election interference.

This demonstrates the power of source documents. It’s easy to discount a Justice Department official or a summary report. A detailed NSA document is much more convincing. Right now, there’s a federal suit to force the ODNI to release the entire January report, not just the unclassified summary. These efforts are vital.

This hack will certainly come up at the Senate hearing where former FBI director James B. Comey is scheduled to testify Thursday. Last year, there were several stories about voter databases being targeted by Russia. Last August, the FBI confirmed that the Russians successfully hacked voter databases in Illinois and Arizona. And a month later, an unnamed Department of Homeland Security official said that the Russians targeted voter databases in 20 states. Again, we don’t know of anything that came of these hacks, but expect Comey to be asked about them. Unfortunately, any details he does know are almost certainly classified, and won’t be revealed in open testimony.

But more important than any of this, we need to better secure our election systems going forward. We have significant vulnerabilities in our voting machines, our voter rolls and registration process, and the vote tabulation systems after the polls close. In January, DHS designated our voting systems as critical national infrastructure, but so far that has been entirely for show. In the United States, we don’t have a single integrated election. We have 50-plus individual elections, each with its own rules and its own regulatory authorities. Federal standards that mandate voter-verified paper ballots and post-election auditing would go a long way to secure our voting system. These attacks demonstrate that we need to secure the voter rolls, as well.

Democratic elections serve two purposes. The first is to elect the winner. But the second is to convince the loser. After the votes are all counted, everyone needs to trust that the election was fair and the results accurate. Attacks against our election system, even if they are ultimately ineffective, undermine that trust and ­– by extension ­– our democracy. Yes, fixing this will be expensive. Yes, it will require federal action in what’s historically been state-run systems. But as a country, we have no other option.

This essay previously appeared in the Washington Post.

Julia language for Raspberry Pi

Post Syndicated from Ben Nuttall original https://www.raspberrypi.org/blog/julia-language-raspberry-pi/

Julia is a free and open-source general purpose programming language made specifically for scientific computing. It combines the ease of writing in high-level languages like Python and Ruby with the technical power of MATLAB and Mathematica and the speed of C. Julia is ideal for university-level scientific programming and it’s used in research.

Julia language logo

Some time ago Viral Shah, one of the language’s co-creators, got in touch with us at the Raspberry Pi Foundation to say his team was working on a port of Julia to the ARM platform, specifically for the Raspberry Pi. Since then, they’ve done sterling work to add support for ARM. We’re happy to announce that we’ve now added Julia to the Raspbian repository, and that all Raspberry Pi models are supported!

Not only did the Julia team port the language itself to the Pi, but they also added support for GPIO, the Sense HAT and Minecraft. What I find really interesting is that when they came to visit and show us a demo, they took a completely different approach to the Sense HAT than I’d seen before: Simon, one of the Julia developers, started by loading the Julia logo into a matrix within the Jupyter notebook and then displayed it on the Sense HAT LED matrix. He then did some matrix transformations and the Sense HAT showed the effect of these manipulations.

Viral says:

The combination of Julia’s performance and Pi’s hardware unlocks new possibilities. Julia on the Pi will attract new communities and drive applications in universities, research labs and compute modules. Instead of shipping the data elsewhere for advanced analytics, it can simply be processed on the Pi itself in Julia.

Our port to ARM took a while, since we started at a time when LLVM on ARM was not fully mature. We had a bunch of people contributing to it – chipping away for a long time. Yichao did a bunch of the hard work, since he was using it for his experiments. The folks at the Berkeley Race car project also put Julia and JUMP on their self-driving cars, giving a pretty compelling application. We think we will see many more applications.

I organised an Intro to Julia session for the Cambridge Python user group earlier this week, and rather than everyone having to install Julia, Jupyter and all the additional modules on their own laptops, we just set up a room full of Raspberry Pis and prepared an SD card image. This was much easier and also meant we could use the Sense HAT to display output.

Intro to Julia language session at Raspberry Pi Foundation
Getting started with Julia language on Raspbian
Julia language logo on the Sense HAT LED array

Simon kindly led the session, and before long we were using Julia to generate the Mandelbrot fractal and display it on the Sense HAT:

Ben Nuttall on Twitter

@richwareham’s Sense HAT Mandelbrot fractal with @JuliaLanguage at @campython https://t.co/8FK7Vrpwwf

Naturally, one of the attendees, Rich Wareham, progressed to the Julia set – find his code here: gist.github.com/bennuttall/…

Last year at JuliaCon, there were two talks about Julia on the Pi. You can watch them on YouTube:

Install Julia on your Raspberry Pi with:

sudo apt update
sudo apt install julia

You can install the Jupyter notebook for Julia with:

sudo apt install julia libzmq3-dev python3-zmq
sudo pip3 install jupyter
julia -e 'Pkg.add("IJulia");'

And you can easily install extra packages from the Julia console:

Pkg.add("SenseHat")

The Julia team have also created a resources website for getting started with Julia on the Pi: juliaberry.github.io

Julia team visiting Pi Towers

There never was a story of more joy / Than this of Julia and her Raspberry Pi

Many thanks to Viral Shah, Yichao Yu, Tim Besard, Valentin Churavy, Jameson Nash, Tony Kelman, Avik Sengupta and Simon Byrne for their work on the port. We’re all really excited to see what people do with Julia on Raspberry Pi, and we look forward to welcoming Julia programmers to the Raspberry Pi community.

The post Julia language for Raspberry Pi appeared first on Raspberry Pi.

Dear Lazyweb!

Post Syndicated from Lennart Poettering original http://0pointer.net/blog/mexico-lamp.html

Let’s see how well Lazyweb works for me!

One of the nicest types of lamps I know is depicted on this photo:

mexico lamp

This lamp is built from a number (16 or so, it’s so difficult to count) of
identical shapes which are put together (a mano) in a very simple, mathematical
fashion. No glue or anything else is need to make it a very robust object. The
lamp looks a little bit like certain Julia fractals, its geometrical structure
is just beautiful. Every mathematical mind will enjoy it.

This particular specimen has been bought from a street dealer in Mexico
City, and has been made of thin plastic sheets. I saw the same model made from
paper on a market near Barcelona this summer (during GUADEC). Unfortunately I
didn’t seize the chance to buy any back then, and now I am regretting it!

I’ve been trying to find this model in German and US shops for the last
months (Christmas is approaching fast!) but couldn’t find a single specimen. I
wonder who designed this ingenious lamp and who produces it. It looks like a
scandinavian design to me, but that’s just an uneducated guess.

If you have any information about this specific lamp model, or could even
provide me with a pointer where to buy or how to order these lamps in/from
Germany, please leave a comment to this blog story, or write me an email to
mzynzcr (at) 0pointer (dot) de! Thank you very much!

Fractals with Python

Post Syndicated from Lennart Poettering original http://0pointer.net/blog/projects/mandelbrot.html

It’s impressing how easy it is to draw fractals with Python. Using the ubercool Python Imaging Library and native complex number support in Python you can code an elaborate and easy to understand fractal generator in less than 50 lines of code:

#!/usr/bin/python
import Image, ImageDraw, math, colorsys

dimensions = (800, 800)
scale = 1.0/(dimensions[0]/3)
center = (2.2, 1.5)       # Use this for Mandelbrot set
#center = (1.5, 1.5)       # Use this for Julia set
iterate_max = 100
colors_max = 50

img = Image.new("RGB", dimensions)
d = ImageDraw.Draw(img)

# Calculate a tolerable palette
palette = [0] * colors_max
for i in xrange(colors_max):
    f = 1-abs((float(i)/colors_max-1)**15)
    r, g, b = colorsys.hsv_to_rgb(.66+f/3, 1-f/2, f)
    palette[i] = (int(r*255), int(g*255), int(b*255))

# Calculate the mandelbrot sequence for the point c with start value z
def iterate_mandelbrot(c, z = 0):
    for n in xrange(iterate_max + 1):
        z = z*z +c
        if abs(z) > 2:
            return n
    return None

# Draw our image
for y in xrange(dimensions[1]):
    for x in xrange(dimensions[0]):
        c = complex(x * scale - center[0], y * scale - center[1])

        n = iterate_mandelbrot(c)            # Use this for Mandelbrot set
        #n = iterate_mandelbrot(complex(0.3, 0.6), c)  # Use this for Julia set

        if n is None:
            v = 1
        else:
            v = n/100.0

        d.point((x, y), fill = palette[int(v * (colors_max-1))])

del d
img.save("result.png")

Some example pictures:

Julia Set Mandelbrot Set.