Slashdot Mirror

From what I remember they didn't bust down on people that extended the iTunes music sharing beyond the LAN.

To the extent they could, they did. Interfacing directly with iTunes is a no-no.

While I agree that Linux is not quite there for average users, I'd say that it's definitely in the last few yards of the marathon. It's too bad that he didn't take this opportunity to encourage hardware manufacturers to make fewer winmodems or winprinters or winwhatevers.

I'm very unhappy to hear the CEO of Red Hat adding some legitimacy to Redmond's FUD, even if it's a transparent effort to showcase Red Hat's Enterprise solution.

ps. Wouldn't it be great if you order something over the Internet, legitimately, using your own credit card, receive the product or service but never pay a single penny? Well you can, it's easy, every online retailer knows how it's done and credit card companies have no interest in preventing it. Ask any retailer who is to blame for credit card fraud and the answer will be the same: Credit card companies. I'm not an expert on the subject but I feel confident in saying that with a change of policy from credit card issuers, upwards of 90% of online card fraud could be stopped over-night. I also feel confident in saying that this change of policy will not happen.

In Europa, this is going to change with the introduction of the credit card with a chip in it and a PIN-number needed for authentication. For more information about it, visit these sites.

As usual, the good old USA is falling behind again ;)

I was at the European Technology Forum Technology Summit event in London recently where Mike Lynch (Ph.D), CEO of Autonomy gave a keynote speech responding to this article. Essentially, Mike said that the article is "fundamentally wrong" and "anyone who asserts IT doesn't matter must be from another planet". A very interesting read... we've barely scratched the surface when it comes to IT. Autonomy develop software to manage unstructured information, something current IT is not very good at.

This would fall in line with the security-as-PR campaign. MS has been fighting to prevent further discussion or disclosure of problems in order to prevent all-out panic from end users as it goes over to monthly patching. Since there have been several indications that it wishes to show a short turn around time, the easiest way is to delay the announcement of the bug / hole/ flaw. Since the present is under attack, it would only make sense to revise the past.

Not sure how ontopic this is but..

From zdnet:"To stay on the Microsoft road map, customers must move to .Net, (which) requires significant retraining and redevelopment," Docknevich said in his presentation. Microsoft's .Net initiative provides a new foundation for software that uses next-generation Internet services and other significant changes.

Switching to Linux, instead of learning .net, will somehow save money?

Believe me, I'm not a troll. I just believe that its better to point out your own mistakes, before someone else does.

Also (DMCA, not NET) Dennis Rocci went to jail for selling Xbox mod chips.

Everyone knows about Skylarov getting picked up, but this seems to be another untold story of jail time for copyright convictions.

The first DMCA conviction was Thomas Michael Whitehead for selling DirectTV cracks.

The speed at which memory transfers over a bus to a CPU does not grow at this rate. We need to change some fundamental architecture pretty soon.

This isn't the article I'm thinking of but it's
close.

There was one with a graph of the two growth rates. I'll keep looking.

So.. I just have to ask: Where's Linux headed next?

Well, right now they're readying for the release of the 2.6.0 kernel, which they were saying in July would be ready in "less than" 7 months and will start showing up in boxed products shortly after that (probably whenever 2.6.2 comes). The new kernel brings, among other things, an O(1) scheduler, improved responsiveness for user actions, and vastly improved support for linux in embedded devices. One can also expect ReiserFS to begin to gain wider acceptance in this period. After that it looks like the schedule seems mostly to be to improve support for enterprise-class ("big iron") environments.

On the side of things more directly related to the user, GNOME is readying for their 2.4 release, which they expect by spring. 2.4 promises an unprecidented degree of polish, and may well prove to be the release that finally reaches the point "normal people" can deal with it-- if for no other reason than that it will FINALLY offer a clear, sane, graphical way for X users to *change their fricking screen resolution*. 2.4 will probably also be the version that Sun uses once they start shipping GNOME as the default desktop environment for Solaris.

On the other side of the user-interface fence, the competing KDE project will be releasing version 3.2 in december. Among other things will include inproved font support and a bundled groupware suite. After that it appears that among their plans is work on abstracting their theme display stuff by moving toward SVG-based graphics, which among other things will improve accessability by improving the support for those who need high-contrast or large-type displays.

Sounds pretty busy to me. That answer your question?

Is this going to be how notice and takedown is dealt with throughout Europe in future?

No, not when Europe adopts their own draconian DMCA. I imagine that there will be a comparable amount of corporations-turned-thugs as there are here.

Security hole hits patched Internet Explorer
Microsoft Recalls Botched Browser Security Patch
MS security patch slows XP systems to a crawl
Microsoft withdraws faulty server patch
Microsoft replaces, broadens faulty Exchange patch
Microsoft fixes another faulty patch
Faulty Patch Leaves IE Open to Attack
More patching problems for Microsoft
Minor glitch in Win2K patch

"Why has no-one been charged with a crime at all?"

They have. The RIAA and the Secret Service have teamed up on raids. Additionally, the government's "Operation Buccanneer" program went after music pirates, and got one.

"Is it that violations of copyright are not actually criminal acts but rather are civil matters to be disputed between the copyright holder and the unauthorized publisher?"

Not hardly. You're spreading incorrect information. Here's what the law says.

"Do not allow the RIAA to spread the idea that all P2P downloads are illegal."

Who told you that the RIAA is trying to spread the idea that all P2P downloads are illegal? Do you have a citation?

Please -- there are enough credible arguments for straightening out copyright laws; no need to resort to spreading FUD or just making shit up.

Letting patent lawyers decide what should be patented - is like letting generals decide when to go to war.

Exactly!

The only difference is that while the generals in all civilized countries would also agree that it would be a seriously bad idea to let the "experts" decide instead of the democratically elected institutions, there are plenty of patent lawyers that openly argue that the field of patent law should be above the reach of the democratic process, and should be dictated by the patent lawyers themselves.

I wrote a reply to one patent lawyer who was expressing that idea, and repost it here:

Democracy may not be so bad after all

In the ZDNet article Software patent limits 'go to far' , legal expert Alex Batteson argues that although "it may seem undemocratic", the outcome of the recent European Parliament vote on software patents proves that the issue is too complex to be handled by the parliament, and should have been left to the experts.

While I agree with Mr. Batteson that the issue of software patents is far too complex to be handed over to the European Parliament in the manner that it was, I still have to disagree with him when he suggests that the matter should be handled by the patent lawyers instead.

I have just spent an entire day going through the amendments that the European Parliament made to the resolution before adopting it, just to form my own opinion as to whether FFII, the Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure, really has a leg to stand on when it describes the resolution as a victory for the opponents of software patents. As I am neither a lawyer nor a politician, but merely a programmer and citizen, I wouldn't really have gained much insight by just reading through the resolution as is. Instead, I went through the amendments one by one and checked what the FFII had said on each issue before the vote, and what they said afterwards.

After having gone through this process, I am now prepared to agree with the FFII that the adopted resolution is indeed a victory, and that it is a good thing that it passed, but like I said, it took me a day of reading just to reach this conclusion.

It is quite obvious that it was completely unreasonable to expect the parliament members, who would normally neither be programmers nor patent lawyers, to vote together a consistent legislative proposal in a plenary session lasting less than an hour, squeezed in between a resolution about the situation in Iraq, a proposal on European energy taxation, and a statement on the fisheries agreement with Mauritius. I think that the fact that they nevertheless managed to put together a good resolution does them great credit, and shows that many of them must have realised that this is an issue that deserves to be taken seriously.

But how did it come to this?

Well, this is where I have to disagree with Mr. Batteson's position, and state that I prefer the democratic road, despite all its shortcomings. While it is doubtlessly true that a group of patent lawyers working behind closed doors would have come up with a legislative resolution that was technically much more consistent, it would have been a resolution with radically differen

They have their own rapidly growing technology sector, including china developed chips and Red Flag linux and they are building their own space agency. Investmenting in technology is crucial to challenging the US lead economically, politically and militarily.

They have little or no foreign debt and growing economic power...

This rather than being the New American Century is likely to be Chinese!

Even though you're sticking with Windows 2000, which is what many Windows users are planning to do, you threw away your options on refusing DRM when you installed SP3. Windows 2000 SP3 gives MS admin rights to your box, which has been suggested as a means to force upgrades even if it means breaking your existing applications. MS has worked hard and long enough to earn its shoddy reputation that I don't doubt that if it stays in business, it will eventually force DRM once Palladium (aka NGSCB/BIOS/LaGrande/Office2003) reaches critical market saturation.

Though as a business you have more flexibility as there is less obligation to keep records accessible to the public than would a government agency or service. Plus if vendor lock-in and unreasonable IT costs tip your business over the edge into bankruptcy, no one except you would notice. Every one else just sees a failed company.

As Schneier predicted, for Microsoft, the threat is bad publicity, and they are going to produce a security system that deals with the threat. Without some kind of disclosure, sysadmins cannot take stop gap measures to secure their systems. This is just another instance of rather than working on securing its products to a level needed for the Internet, the issue is being handled as a PR problem.

Time to upgrade if you haven't already.

"Sun Microsystems, for instance, is designing a supercomputer under a $50m (31.6m) grant from the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (Darpa) that will contain 100,000 processors, according to Jim Mitchell, who heads up Sun's labs. The whole thing could conceivably fit into a room."

5.2 million is a lot less then 50 million.

That isn't correct. Microsoft used Tony Blair to help promote the launch of Office XP -not Windows XP. This was reported at ZDNet News.

Microsoft is not the first company to pursue a patent over IM. In December 2002, AOL subsidiary ICQ won a patent that claimed rights as the inventor of IM. AOL has not flexed its muscle on the patent, and competitive IM services remain active.

So 2 questions, if AOL has the patent for IM how can MS patent a feature?

If push comes to shove, which patent will trump the other?

Whoops wrong link, sorry-

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/communications/wireless/0, 39020348,39116980,00.htm

Sorry, haven't had time to continue this discussion, nor do I think we will ever agree on this.

However, you might be interested in this story.

It appears no US companies will be directly rebuilding the Iraqi infrastructure. This probably doesn't make you less suspicious of our intentions though.

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/internet/security/0,390203 75,39116970,00.htm

Oh, and they'll be building a GSM network. That's incompatible with most of the US cellular equipment manufacturers.

Besides, it was announced months ago that standalone MSIE is dead and there will be no further versions.

What would seem to be simple logic isn't always the case. If you will direct your attention here, you will discover that, depending on the task, an early Pentium 4-M could actually be outperformed by the higher end Pentium 3-M of the time.

First, there will be a further clamp down on what is convered in the media and how it is spun: "To Microsoft, the threat is bad publicity, and they are going to produce a security system that deals with the threat," he said. [Schneier] said.

Realize also that Microsoft in all likelihood is going to try to make the option DRM patch mandatory, if for no other reason than to lock out competitors. ""Windows 2003 may be secure, but the level of security it provides could break backwards compatibility."

The last thing MS wants is for people to go over to the new version of OpenOffice.org or to avoid the hidden payloads in WMP9 by using Ogg. Office2003 and WMP9 are essential vectors in getting the "optional" DRM patch into Windows machines.

I do not claim to have insider knowledge. It was however publicly known the Newton Business Unit was well on it's way to become profitable very fast with the Newton 2000 and the Newton 2100. These products were way beyond their time, with some PocketPCs and the newer Palms only now finally faster than these thingies.

The handwriting technology was finally working near flawlessly and the OS in itself was a masterpiece.

No, IMHO the Newton was not killed because it was a dead end. Just look at the applications that still come out for it. If it was deader than dead, no-one would have cared.

Apple spins off Newton, early 97.

I do remember stories about the development environment, being a custom built PowerMac 9500 with some custom boards attached, not being the most scalable platform around.

Remember?

Its really a shame that theres always someone out there who figures theyr'e the ones that can get a fair shake...

"...the life cycle of this [hardware] generation will be the longest of any in the industry's short history"

The biggest threat to the PlayStation2 is that the Xbox changes the industry's life cycle

>> They've never even announced a date for Longhorn. What on earth are you talking about?

I quote from one of their Press Pass documents they have online at microsoft.com:

"Over the course of 2004 you'll see a couple of releases in the betas for "Longhorn" and we'll see that coming to market in 2005.

Now, I'm sure that many of you have heard about or wonder about the possibility of whether we're going to do something before "Longhorn," is there an interim release, and that's something that I don't expect us to do. Currently we have some additional releases that are coming out as follow-ons to the XP Media Center Edition and the Tablet PC Edition so we've got some great advances and fit and finish and addressing additional international marketplaces with new handwriting recognition, new guide data for Europe for the Media Center and so on.

So you'll see some good incremental moves there but really the weight of the company, the weight of all the people in the Windows client division and across the platform's division, the weight of that effort that we're doing is around "Longhorn" and that's what we're focused on and we hope to get you all really pulling the same way so we can come out with a huge wave of excitement for the industry when "Longhorn" ships in 2005."

(quotes and italics mine.)

Several online sources have credited varying target dates for Longhorn, but all generally agree that 2005 will be the earliest that it will be available to the mass market:
Longhorn Betas in 2004, GA in 2005 (ENT News)
Analyst Pegs Longhorn Release at 2006 (ENT News)
Microsoft Pushes Back 'Longhorn' Release (Open Tech Support)
A Longhorn Delay? Not Quite (WinInfo)
Microsoft announces Longhorn release date (CNet News.com)
(I have no affiliation with these sources.)

Microsoft themselves show that 2005 is the target date of Longhorn in a slide picture. (png image)

>> As if that matters. Those are early, early alpha shots, as we all know. All the cool builds with the 3D acceleration are in a different Microsoft lab anyway that hasn't had one of their builds leaked.

First, can you prove there are "cool builds" that will have 100% of the suggested features in a shipping version of Longhorn? Secondly, the history of Microsoft's software release stategy has been plainly made clear numerous times. Hype, Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt, Buzzwords-o'-the-day, Gross Appropriation (oh sorry, I mean Innovation), and just downright unfullfilled expectations litter the computer timescape.

For a company that has been in the software business of well over 25 years, one would think that with their talk of innovation and "exciting new time-saving" features, we would all have an operating system on our machines that used voice controlled openGL hyper speed interfaces, smart enough to do your work for you while you browsed sites like slashdot. Isn't the entire point of using a computer to save time and be more productive? This sadly is not the case today .

>> I'm not really sure what breathing room you're talking about. The developer preview of Longhorn is coming out later this year. The list of features Longhorn already boasts is staggering, and I doubt within two years that ANY Linux projects will come close. We'll still be stucking using X11 with a hacked on desktop simulator, business as usual.

You mean like this?

blade desktops? (assuming you've not already got the hardware?).
I've just read an article about them at ZDNet.
Looks like the main manufacturer at the moment is ClearCube, although HP are about to get in on the act.

Okay, I will have to assume you are not an employee of Cypress Semiconductor, trying to create a "buzz" on the Internet about the new product family. Cypress Semiconductor created such technology and currently touts it under WirelessUSB brand. Granted, I don't think there's a consumer device using WirelessUSB just yet, but Cypress is currently selling the chips and chipsets to the OEMs. The prices are quite good, by the way, if you're involved with embedded devices or home automation products.

The WirelessUSB specs from Cypress Web site - "..The wireless connectivity is transparent to the designer at the operating system level (no drivers needed), as the WirelessUSB system acts as a USB HID class device..."

ZDNet on WirelessUSB

Naturally, Google

No, there was one missing detail... DMCA.
But, it seems that it's not going to be the case soon: Europe heading down DMCA route, warns think tank

Welcome to One World.

This is a decision based upon consumer experiences, child protection and our strategic investment to build up MSN Messenger.[my emphasis]

This would be a good opportunity to turn people on to cross-platform IM clients like GAIM. I doubt anyone in the tech communities is naive enough to take the children argument as more than a red herring to keep IM from joinging the OS/Broswer/Mediaformat/Office format anti-trust action. It does, however, provide a very good cover for pushing people into MS-Passport, despite its reputation, and for locking out non-Microsoft IM clients.

Alternately, this can be seen as just another product or service being dropped or postponed as the company sheds weight to try to stay afloat.

Lastly, regarding the link. This is being covered by everyone and his dog, even Reuters, so no need to plug poor sources..

Interestingly, Sun is thinking of indemnifying Linux uses against SCO's reality distortion field if they use Java. Strange, no?

Maybe it's just Enronb-money. If it's real, they better spend it before somebody else does

This should clarify Sun's position on SCO and Linux: Sun may shelter Java users from SCO. I personally am starting to hate them more and more.

Bad memory, huh? Many of MS patches don't work. Why do you think their record of bad security is so criticized?

I've had great luck with multiDesk on the windows machines at work.

buying something which works can often be a lot cheaper

From my past few years, I've found that RedHat and SuSe are much easier to maintain than the MS offerings, and installation seems easier and faster. Debian and OS X still lead on ease of maintenance.

As to the money in the bank, show it. Enron, Worldcom and others all had plenty up until they got an audit. As I see it their revenues are shrinking.

Even if the money is there it could easily disappear in security fines, anti-trust fines, and other penalties for making products that fail to live up to the marketing pitch, leaving nothing but a debt.

Apple, a company with an active history for innovation, in contrast, seems to have hit a home run with OS and with the new line of hardware - iBook, PowerBook, G5, and iMac.

Outlook Express: Death Is Exaggerated (PCWorld.com)
Outcry forces reprieve for Outlook Express (ZDNet UK)

OSNews Discussion

OE might be in the IE boat tho, meaning no release until the next release of Windows, as suggested on Beta News. So there will be an opportunity, but not a gaping hole as the next release of Windows will forcefully spread the next version of OE again.

No self driving cars, but I did see that toyota has made a self parking car.

I think people will never be able to give up complete control over their car.

"5.9 Benchmark Testing. You may not disclose the results of any benchmark test of the .NET Framework component of the Product to any third party without Microsoft's prior written approval."

The ZDNet article on the protest says that "More than 600 Web sites are to take part" in the website blackout.

Another of their articles mentions "hundreds of websites"

Is it just my imagination, or is "more than 600" a slightly crap phrase to describe 2953 websites?

The ZDNet article on the protest says that "More than 600 Web sites are to take part" in the website blackout.

Another of their articles mentions "hundreds of websites"

Is it just my imagination, or is "more than 600" a slightly crap phrase to describe 2953 websites?

Remember those "required patches"? When I installed them, there was a EULA. This one said, "You are not allowed to publish the results of benchmark testing of the .NET Framework." What the f*** does that have to do with installing a required security patch?

For what it's worth, Network Associates lost a lawsuit over this very issue (benchmark banning). Companies will write whatever they want into EULAs but that doesn't make them enforcable... the sad thing is that a lawsuit typically has to be involved.

Anyway, doesn't it ever occur to the press that Microsoft could actually be doing a better job researching into securifying their products *pre* release?

The obstical to progress is lack of discussion about solving the problem, and especially lack of discussion about selecting technology based on technical merits rather than admiration of Bill Gates' personal wealth.

It is very difficult for casual users to find a way off the Wintel hamster wheel. Not only do OEMs push only MS products, computer magazines do not publish real product reviews any more. It's like one big cult and discussion or critique of technical issues turns ad hominem. e.g. "Oh, you just hate MS".

It's even harder for the non-technical, general public. Radio, television, and newspapers contribute to the problem by effectively providing spin / damage control for MS by omitting the obvious fact that all these worms and viruses are due to product defects either in design or implementation or both. Instead of refering to all MSTDs as "Interent Worms" or "E-mail Viruses, news sources could easily be pointing out the cause of the problem or replacement technologies. e.g. Point out mail clients like Eudora, Evolution, Mozilla, Opera, and even old pine are consistently higher quality, especially in regards to stability and security. Or, point out operating systems like Linux, BSD, Solaris, Netware, QNX, or OS X which are easier to maintain, more stable, and more secure. Now that KDE is as easy (or difficult) as WInXp, there's no excuse not to.

It's probably time to ask, "Is Windows ready for the Internet?" The answer is likely to be a resounding, "NO!"

When is somebody going to finally decide to call them on this and force Microsoft to do a security audit?

Wasn't the PS3 "Cell" chip made by IBM and Sony supposed to deliver 1 teraflop too?