Slashdot Mirror

Government Surveillance

Why do government have no respect for your right to privacy?

Liberty has to be one of the most important things in life. Well up there, behind health and safety of your family, must be the right to go about your daily life without being forced to live it under oppressive surveillance. For it surely is oppression - being spied upon by the authorities in all that you do. Knowing this information could be used against you, for any purpose they see fit. The so-called all-seeing eye of God over you - meant to instil respect of them and fear of authority.

It can be proven they use propaganda to deceive you into believing them. How?

Ask Security Services in the US, UK, Indonesia (Bali) or anywhere for that matter, to deny this:

Internet surveillance, using Echelon, Carnivore or back doors in encryption, will not stop terrorists communicating by other means - most especially face to face or personal courier.

Terrorists will have to do that, or they will be caught!

Perhaps using mobile when absolutely essential, saying - Meet you in the pub Monday (meaning, human bomb to target A), or Tuesday (target B) or Sunday (abort).

The Internet has become a tool for government to snoop on their people - 24/7.

The terrorism argument is a dummy - total bull*.

INTERNET SURVEILLANCE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO STOP TERRORISTS - THAT IS SPIN AND PROPAGANDA

This propaganda is for several reasons, including: a) making you feel safer b) to say the government are doing something and c) the more malicious motive of privacy invasion.

Government say about surveillance - you've nothing to fear - if you are not breaking the law

This argument is made to pressure people into acquiescence - else appear guilty of hiding something illegal.

It does not address the real reason why they want this information (which they will deny) - they want a surveillance society.

They wish to invade your basic human right to privacy. This is like having somebody watching everything you do - all your personal thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them.

This is everything - including phone calls and interactive TV. Quote from ZDNET: Whether you're just accessing a Web site, placing a phone call, watching TV or developing a Web service, sometime in the not to distant future, virtually all such transactions will converge around Internet protocols.

Why should I worry? I do not care if they know what I do in my own home, you may foolishly say. Or, just as dumbly, They will not be interested in anything I do.

This information will be held about you until the authorities need it for anything at all. Like, for example, here in UK when government looked for dirt on individuals of Paddington crash survivors group. It was led by badly injured Pam Warren. She had over 20 operations after the 1999 rail crash (which killed 31 and injured many).

This group had fought for better and safer railways - all by legal means. By all accounts a group of fine outstanding people - with good intent.

So what was their crime, to deserve this

There's a much better article at ZDnet listing the many difficiencies, problems, and bugs with bluetooth.

Even the head people from the Bluetooth Special Interest Group weren't able to make many devices work.

What the fuck has SCO done? Jack squat.

Eaten Caldera from the inside and destroyed it. Caldera did actually contribute useful code to Linux under Ransom Love's "unification" programme, but alas, no more.

Of course, The SCO Group now has to prove that the code in question wasn't contributed by Caldera.

Pretty simple really; for Windows 2000:

* Open "My Computer"
* Select "Tools/Folder Options"
* Click on File Types tab
* Find VBScript Script File
* Select Delete
* Click OK

I'm trying to find instructions for modifying the security in Outlook 2000 as well, so it doesn't do anything automatically without a) my approval at the very least, or b) me asking it to run an attachment.

If anyone has pointers/links to articles on Outlook security, please post. Thanks!

If the 3r33t community hated other software/platforms as much as they hated Microsoft I'm sure the level of bugs exposed/viruses would be equally as high. I'm not saying Microsoft throws all beautiful software around, but if you devote time to finding holes in software, you'll find it no matter who the maker. As a fair example, look at what happens Larry Ellison tries to make grand claims about the stability of Oracle software. Many of you have valid opinions, and that's respectable, but how so many people can blindly hate Microsoft because of the hate trend makes me want them to succeed.

They should just unplug China's Guangdong province from the rest of the Internet - that should buy Asia a few more IP Addresses', and the 'dongs can hack and spam themselves instead of the rest of us :-)

nycroft wrote:

Let's be fair, just 'cause we don't like M$, and just 'cause they have the major share of the market, that's no reason to throw the word monopoly around. Besides, there's no way that M$ could be a monopoly now. They were accused by several states for anti-competitive practices. That in no way makes them a monopoly because there are still other choices.

There is every reason to throw the word "monopoly" at Microsoft. They were found guilty in a federal court of law (upheld on appeal) of abusing their monopoly.

Just because the new administration's DoJ wimped out and settled for a wrist slap, doesn't negate these facts:

• Microsoft has a monopoly, by antitrust definitions.
• Microsoft abused that monopoly and broke the law.
• Microsoft has been found guilty.

If M$ actually forced the competition out of business (which they will never do as long as Linux gains popularity), then they would be a monopoly, legally and definitively. But they are not.

Where have you been? Microsoft has been ripping into one company after the other for many years, like a hungry T. Rex on a rampage.

This is a story from 1997, on just a few of Microsoft's crushed foes back then.

"Really, gentlemen, if that's the case, let's see the power of attorney given to you by Mothra."
Torahata "Mothra vs. Godzilla" 1964
IANAL, but I can sing a mean "Mosura no Uta". ;)

Zdnet
NewsForge

Slashdotters defending DRM... am I crazy or am I the last sane one? I'm not sure sure anymore.

Slashdot continues to get more mainstream readership, even getting mentioned in print articles these days. As a side effect of this visibility, the activity of astroturfers has increased -- notice that the pro-MS AC(s) tend to have the same writing style and logical fallacies. When other readers put them in their place, a handful UIDs dog pile one or two posters with ad hominem attacks or the "you-just-don't-like-Microsoft" (appeal to emotion?) attack. Microsoft has a long practice of 'turfing in it's marketing:

• MSFT paid Gartner to publish MSFT material as Gartner's
• fake "grass roots" letter writing
• another fake letter writing campaign
• paid for people to hang out in AOL forums
• paid for people to hang out in ZDNet "talkback" forums
• paid for people to hang out in CompuServe forums
• MSNBC doctored Wall Street Journal material
• Stuffed an on-line ballot box
• planned to plant fake op-ed pieces in local newspapers
• funded favorable think-tank whitepapers
• 'Astroturf' PR campaign exposes Microsoft goals.
• Joseph Menn. "Lobbyists Tied to Microsoft Wrote Citizens' Letters." The Los Angeles Times; Aug 23, 2001; pg. A.1 (print)
• Windows Outstuffs Linux in Poll
• Dead People, Fake Letters, Support Microsoft - Report
• Dead people rise in support of Microsoft
• Microsoft employee's move against AOL backfires
• The Freedom to Innovate Network - an 'Astroturf' Organisation

Also, right now MS is in a panicked marketing blitz. notice all the product placement on the tech sites. The embarassing stuff just disappears from the top page less than a day, but the press releases sit there for weeks.

It makes sense. Most Windows users have both Windows and Office because it's what the OEMs had installed on the machines they bought, nothing more or less. Most of these are either apathetic or know nothin else, so they will not write. Others are pissed off at the low quality, made worse by Microsoft treating security and stability issues as PR issues -- How many times have you heard "computers" crash from BSD, Novell, QNX, Linux, or OS X users? Or is it just the MSCEs? Most remaining clients could go easily over to OS X or one of the Linux distros and the next IT boom would start, like the previous one, without Microsoft.

In short, they need DRM to survive the summer and few, except for MS and RIAA staff

> Here are some good links for those of you who want to know more...

There's always ZDNet. if you don't like /. Even better you could enjoy Thurrott's exciting Supersite. You know, the internet is full of sites... hudreds of thousands... sick of one... vote with your feet (or mouse).
I dwell /. and like it *because* it's a souped up interblog... and *I* love M$ bashing, bought a Mac and like to hear *biased* news and for once feel like someone who digs Britney Spears entering a media store ;-)

The original article is on zdnet here

Do not dismiss X10 (the technology) just because some lame company has hijacked it and promotes the use of the products for illegal surveillance (yes, making a recording of you trying to boink your drunk and ugly date without her knowing is indeed illegal).

There are plenty of good companies to get X10 products from without going through X10.com. Smarthome and Radio Shack are a couple.

It's a shame X10.com chose the sleasy marking route because it really has tainted a pretty decent and useful technology.

-S

Going to ZDNet always causes Mozilla to crash and burn for me. (Mozilla 1.3 on Slackware 9.0)

Second - OT - why so few? My profile tells Slashdot to show me all stories. Period. But this one was never on my front page. Hmmm. I also notice that the sidebar on my front page shows "Ask Slashdot" was last updated on April 20. Odd. I guess I can't trust that I'm seeing all stories after all. And with so few replies, I guess few others saw it, either.

Anyway, back to the subject: After much research came up empty I thought I'd Ask Slashdot, and /. has come up empty also. There's just no good Outlook replacement, amazing as that sounds. So, I've decided to forgo email on my PDA (I don't use it much anyway) and forgo a calendar on my desktop. That solves the Outlook sync problem by avoiding it. Now that I'm free of the Outlook sync constraint, anyone care to jump into the flame war of which mailer is best? :-)

Thanks again for your help.

The OO-hating Tablizer is not the only one who likes tables of algorimths and data dictionaries.

Here is an interesting article in ZDNET which is a VERY pro microsoft site. Here is a quote from that article.

In the survey, Linux admin salaries were slightly higher than Windows admins, with Linux at $71,400 per admin, and Windows at $68,500 per admin. But Linux admins took care of an average of 44 servers and Windows admins an average of 10. So the salary per processing unit was Linux, $12,010, and Windows, $52,060.

If Larry predicts something is going to happen, it sure as hell ain't.
What ever happened to the Newtork Computer?

:-)

From the ZDNet.com review of Propel Software Accelerator

Editors' Rating 9.0

Interface and ease of use 10

Installation and setup 10

Service and support 7

Performance 9

Features 9

For years, frustrated Netizens have sought new ways to eke out a few more bits per second from their poky 56K connections. Most speed-up schemes (modem doublers, caching programs, and registry optimizers, such as Internet Rocket) generate a lot of hype but little else. Propel Software, on the other hand, offers a subscription service to boost your browsing that actually works.

When we used Propel Accelerator to download Web pages, they arrived two to three times faster than with a standard 56K connection. In some cases, pages displayed more swiftly than on a high-speed digital subscriber line (DSL). Truly, we were amazed. If you visit the same sites day in and day out--and your ISP budget isn't already stretched to the max--Propel is worth the $5 monthly fee. Keep in mind that it's no substitute for a cable modem or a DSL connection, and if you don't visit the same graphics-intensive sites often, this Internet-caching app's benefits won't be as compelling.

Easy does it
Propel offers the fastest, most painless installation imaginable. After downloading the file, simply click through the install wizard--no need to log off the Internet, close your browser, or reboot. The program simply places an icon in your system tray, and you're ready to go.

Propel works its internal magic in a handful of ways. On your desktop, it compresses graphics and other large files as they download, then decompresses them on the fly inside your browser. The program also caches the pages on your hard drive and updates only the data that's changed, so the same site will load even faster the next time you visit. The software also fools your ISP's servers into thinking you have a persistent connection (à la cable or DSL) by routing Web pages through the Propel network of servers, eliminating annoying dial-up time-out disconnections.

Speed you need
How fast is Propel? To test its speed, we timed a few graphics-intensive pages without Propel, then cleared our browser's cache before accessing the same sites with Propel. When we first visited CNET's home page using a standard 56K connection, the site took 24 seconds to download; using Propel, it took only 8 seconds. The next time we visited, Propel loaded the page in an amazing 4 seconds. The same held true for Amazon--20 seconds without Propel, 11 seconds with, and we eventually got down to an average of 6 seconds. These rates held their ground with a half dozen other sites that we checked. We even tested it using a supercheap ($7 per month) ISP account, and it worked just fine. But the software does nothing to speed up streaming media, file downloads, or POP3 e-mail connections--areas where broadband really shines.

Of course, the benefits of Propel vary depending on how you surf. If you visit graphics-rich (and painfully slow) sites such as ESPN.com, CNN.com, or MSNBC.com, it's a godsend. But if you spend most of your day doing Google searches, you may see little or no difference since Google is already quite fast.

Poor pics; no phones
On the downside, we ran into a few glitches using Propel. Page downloads occasionally stalled, and some pages displayed without any graphics. Propel was also slightly inconsistent; a page might load quickly once, then more slowly the next time. But hey, it's the Internet; bad things happen even to good connections.

Propel doesn't provide any phone support, either, just an extensive online FAQ and e-mail support. We e-mailed a question and received a response--from a human, not a computer--in less than four hours. That's darned fast. In any case, the program is so straightforward, odds are good that you won't need much support.

The next best thing next to broadban

Finally, I'd like to remind you that the personal ID number for computers was already here once - remember that unique ID# embeded in Pentium III chips? The one that intel later released a patch for to disable (which almost nobody did)? Well, that's still here, and people are quiet about whether the same system is used in Pentium IV or not...

This is pure FUD. It's not still here, is was shot down in flames before it got running. They first wanted it on, then controlable in software, but in the end it was removed completely. You may read more about it here. It has been a taboo issue since then, obviously noone at Intel wants to remind people of their past mistakes.

Then again, most computers do have what is usually a unique identifier, the network address MAC. You can usually change this if you like, but very few people care. So if you have the MAC, you can be reasonably sure it's the same computer, particularly those where the NIC is part of the motherboard.

Kjella

At the bottom of the News.com article is this link:

"Wanted: Tech professionals needed at top companies now"

I don't see any warnings about ID theft there, though...

This was copied-and-pasted from here. It was originally a reply to an article posted on ZDNet in October of 2000.

This was copied-and-pasted from here. It was originally a reply to an article posted on ZDNet in October of 2000.

Maybe you're thinking of David Coursey?

Did ZDnet exist before Amazon, or at least do user reviews(zdnet.com) before Amazon started discussions of items?

This post is not off topic, I swear to Dios. The second paragraph contains a bunch of shit, but the first contains useful information. The first paragraph begins here: I just love it when some huge Microsoft ad comes up when I load up a story. Astute readers probably know that I hate Microsoft's guts and that I firmly believe that everything they are/sell/do/say is pure garbage. So when I see one of their ads on Slashdot, I click on it and when their ugly webpage finishes to load, I simply hit the 'back' button. I never look at what they're advertising. Even if I did, I would certainly not be interested in it, whatever it is, because I use products that are in every way superior to theirs. Products like six different distributions of Linux, all three BSDs, versions of BeOS ranging from 3 to 5 (because it's still useful), QNX, IRIX and HP-UX. There were others, but I reduced the list of operating systems to the ones listed here. So Microsoft has to pay for another click that led them nowhere. And I wasted some of their bandwidth. These two facts make me feel good about myself and about who I am. I firmly believe that causing them additional expenses such as the one described herein is a good way to increase one's self esteem (not that I need to do so, what with the 6 different girlfriends I have that don't know about each other, and would probably still love/screw me if they knew, since I am such a studmuffin, so yeah, I have lots of self esteem... girls love guys that troll Slashdot).Now, to what I was going to say about this article before that stupid ad got in my way... Oh, that was in the first paragraph... sorry, forgot.

Actually, I was going to stop here but I think I'll add more...

• http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~wayne/microsoft-sucks.h tml
• http://pub32.ezboard.com/fogrebattle6432793frm13
• http://brighten.bigw.org/humor/mine/microsoft_suck s.html
• http://www.taikahn.com/mssucks.html
• http://www.microsoftsucks.com/
• http://www.never.com/eva/
• http://www.zdnet.com/anchordesk/talkback/talkback_ 253.html
• http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2002/12/18/155016/66
• http://www.spiffle.com/rants/10-05-1999_01-05am

This post has been moderated -9: Sewage.

Here's an an article about it. Or learn about it from the horse's mouth.

ZDNET wi-fi types.

The link you gave had a space in it, thus no one could cut and paste without editing it. A corrected link to that story that he was referring to can be found here.

The Preview button keaps yuo from makign misteaks :-)

Yes, as you mention a book making a very strong case for the open source model has already been published. I recently had the pleasure of meeting Marting Fink, HP's Linux evangelist and author of "The Business & Economics of Open Source" when he gave the keynote speech to the OSW/Business of Open Source Conference in Ottawa two weeks ago. Mr Fink's book sounds very similar to parts of the one the NZOSS is trying to create; perhaps they could ask him to write the Economics and When not to Migrate sections?

BTW, Mr Fink was an engaging speaker and there was good Conference attendance all 'round, even though this was only the first year for the OSW event (2nd for BOSS). Perhaps because it was in Ottawa, there seemed to be many more government/business types than computer types at the Conference. Good sign or Bad sign? Maybe it's time Canada considered more of a paltform-neutral stance à la other governments?

Don't they have a contract with the owners of SCO that mentions that they'll never make a unix like OS?

I didn't know what you were talking about, so I did some googling and found
this.

By the sound of it MS could well distribute Linux, just as long as they didn't call it Unix.

OTOH, I can't see a problem if MS made their own Linux distribution, although they might have some proprietory parts (MS Office?), anything that was currently GPL'd would have to remain GPL'd. It would be a win for OSS!!

(disclaimer: I work for EMC. In spite of that, I would love to see an open-source implementation of the APIs, as it would encourage greater adoption of the technology, and I feel that my employer could do quite well providing high-performance solutions for high-end users. Here is a review of the technology.)

I really want one.
On a lark, I checked out a review, and I now need a new cell phone.

That plan rocks too.

A more practical solution, until everyone has a bluetooth cellphone, from over 2 years ago was sold by simulring. Basically, you get one number and depending on the time of day, it will ring multiple phones at the same time, and connect the caller to whichever answers. For whatever reasons, they closed down a few months ago, but check google.

Don't worry, here is a translation

But don't worry: according to Zdnet/Wired, there is a solution: just make your news clippings site into a P2P network!

The important things in life?

Well right up there, behind health and safety of your family, must be the right to go about your life without being forced to live your life under an oppressive surveillance society. For it surely is oppressive, knowing this information could be used against you for any purpose the authorities wish.

This is quite part from the minor fact it is very leaky - example seen here in UK news today: Revenue staff selling tax secrets. Quote, "There have been a number of instances of celebrity-browsing or looking up details of family or friends out of idle curiosity. But there is also evidence that some people are using the information maliciously, for example finding out how much an ex-spouse earns and passing the information to the Child Support Agency, or even selling the information to outside agencies. This is a clear breach of customer confidentiality and the Data Protection Act." ... "But the Board had become aware about the levels of unauthorised browsing of customer records. They realised the Department needed to draw together a policy to clarify the rules on computer usage and to tighten up the disciplinary consequences of misuse."

The main thing is this - Not enough importance is placed on our Liberty.

Why can't everybody see the blatant use of propaganda, when it is so clear?

I have placed the following on this board many times - the regulars must be sick of it by now - sorry for that :-)

Subject - Ask Security Services to deny this:

First - a quote from the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency: "The goal of the Total Information Awareness (TIA) program is to revolutionize the ability of the United States to detect, classify and identify foreign terrorists -- and decipher their plans -- and thereby enable the U.S. to take timely action to successfully preempt and defeat terrorist acts."

The declared GOAL is to, quote: "identify foreign terrorists" - what rubbish. They know you are American citizen, not even a suspect foreigner - yet want to know what you buy, where you travel - everything. They want to profile you, like a criminal. I find it hard to believe that U.S. politicians are that dumb to go along with this violation of the American Peoples Rights. Looks like TIA initials stand for Totally Ignorant Acceptance (for their propaganda).

Okay then -

Ask Security Services in the US, UK, Indonesia (Bali) or anywhere for that matter, to deny this:

Internet surveillance, using Echelon, Carnivore or back doors in encryption, will not stop terrorists communicating by other means - most especially face to face or personal courier.

Terrorists will have to do that, or they will be caught!

Perhaps using mobile when absolutely essential, saying - "Meet you in the pub Monday" (meaning, human bomb to target A), or Tuesday (target B) or Sunday (abort).

The Internet has become a tool for government to snoop on their people - 24/7.

The terrorism argument is a dummy - total bull*.

INTERNET SURVEILLANCE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO STOP TERRORISTS - THAT IS SPIN AND PROPAGANDA

This propaganda is for several reasons, including: a) making you feel safer b) to say the government are doing something and c) the more malicious motive of privacy invasion.

Government say about surveillance - "you've nothing to fear - if you are not breaking the law"

This argument is made to pressure people into acquiescence - else appear guilty of hiding something illegal.

It does not address the real reason why they want this information (which they will deny) - they want a surveillance society.

They wish to invade your basic human right to privacy. This is like having somebody watching everything you do - all your personal thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them.

This is everything - including phone calls and interactive TV. Quote from ZDNET: "Whether you're just accessing a Web site, placing a phone call, watching TV or developing a Web service, sometime in the not to distant future, virtually all such transactions will converge around Internet protocols."

"Why should I worry? I do not care if they know what I do in my own home", you may foolishly say. Or, just as dumbly, "They will not be interested in anything I do".

This information will be held about you until the authorities need it for anything at all. Like, for example, here in UK when government looked for dirt on individuals of Paddington crash survivors group. It was led by badly injured Pam Warren. She had over 20 operations after the 1999 rail crash (which killed 31 and injured many).

This group had fought for better and safer railways - all by legal means. By all accounts a group of fine outstanding people - with good intent.

So what was their crime, to deserve this investigation?

It was just for showing up members of government to be the incompetents they are.

As usual, government tried to put a different spin on the story when they were found out. Even so, their intent was obvious - they wanted to use this information as propaganda - to smear the character of these good people.

Our honourable government would rather defile the character of its citizens - rather than address their reasonable concerns.

The government arrogantly presume this group of citizens would not worry about having their privacy invaded.

They can also check your outgoings match your income and that you are paying enough tax. What do you think all this privacy invasion is for? The War on Terrorism? You poor dupe. All your finances for them to scrutinize; heaven help you if you cannot account for every cent.

The authorities try make everything they say sound perfectly reasonable.

e.g. Officials from US Defence Department agency have said they want, quote: "the same level of accountability in cyberspace that we now have in the physical world".

Do they keep record of all the people that you send letters and faxes to (and receive from)? Worse still - record the text? Do they record your phone conversations? Do they keep a record of peoples houses, shops and establishments you visit - or the magazines and books you pick up to browse? Do they keep record of books you take out of library? Do they keep record of purchases you make from the shops?

Indeed - do government currently keep records of everything that you say, touch and do in the physical world to analyse?

No they do not. So then - is that the same level of accountability?

They wish to keep an electronic tag on you, like some kind of animal. Actually it is even worse than this - like some pervert sex offender - a child molester that they have to keep track of.

Would ANY person of intelligence call that accountability?

Do not believe the lies of Government - even more of your money spent on these measures will not protect us from terrorists. Every argument they use is subterfuge - pure spin.

In UK, the RIP Act is unjust - dim-witted ill-informed MPs believed governments 'experts'. Remember - they will get everything about you, your phone calls, emails, TV viewing - everything. It would be like having a spy living in your house.

Americans - the Total Information Awareness plan, USA Patriot act and Homeland Defence - you are generally more technologically aware, are you really that easily misled?

I cannot stress enough - all your personal thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them. I know from experience, as fact, they have no morals and will purposefully twist this information to use against you. I have documentary evidence of this - actual government agency case notes. Should government take legal action to deny that they pervert how personal information is used, then these documents may be viewed in a court of Law.

It should be noted that the UK government will be violating the Universal Declaration of Human Rights - which we have adopted.

Article 12 states: "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks."

And if it goes bang, "Let's light this firecracker"

Yep, but now that is irrevelent. Microsoft has combined their code bases for home and business OS's into XP (or so they claim). The Windows95 track is dead, NT is dead. The hybrid OS that would serve both business server needs and home user gaming needs that was promised to us in MS timelines in 1993 is finally here with XP. Or so they say. Apparently not?

You got that right! :)

The problem is, although Windows 95/98 and Windows NT (as an add-in for NT 3.51, and integral in NT 4) share a similar UI, the Win32 API that each platform supported was markedly different. Windows 9x lacked the security APIs and (for a long time) OpenGL, whilst NT did not have the direct hardware access that Windows 9x could fall back on. Also, the hardware driver architechture was completely different between the two.

This was one of the problems that caused the release of what would become Windows 2000 to be pushed back - the new Windows needed to support the features and idiocyncrasies of both platforms, in order to support the *applications* that were being used on either platform. This was the crucial part - it didn't matter how technically superior the new Windows was, if the customer's existing applications wouldn't run properly then it would sink, and quite possibly take Microsoft with it. (Remember, Windows 2000 was the *only* option at this point, there was no Plan B waiting in the wings).

Some links for your further enlightenment :

Microsoft Windows History
Another potted history of Windows (warning - pop-ups lurking here!)
The official word on the name-change to Windows 2000, from Microsoft PressPass
An article on the historical links between Windows NT and VMS (They're more related than you think!)
'Why Windows NT 5.0 Will Make the World a Better Place', written in September 1997(!) by Jesse Berst for ZDNet Anchordesk. Gives a run-down of the feature list at that time, and also gives a figure of how long NT 5.0 had been in development at that point.
'New Windows could solve age-old puzzle', courtesy of News.com - a write-up of the (in)famous Cairo project, and where it fits into the Windows story.

Food for thought, I thing you'll agree.

I'm very skeptical of these kinds of devices. For example, how many people really want stock quotes on their watches? Is there real value in that? How is a stock ticker on a watch significantly better than a stock ticker on a PDA or cell phone? Also, beyond the cool factor, how important is atomic time to Joe Sixpack? Let's face it, if it isn't significantly better, then only technogeeks will care about it. It'll die a quick death. But wait, there's more. The other factor is this. Even if the product is significantly better in terms of functionality, if the usability sucks then uptake of the product in the market could be minimal. IMHO there are many strikes against these products becoming mainstream products any time soon.

1. More on usability: webword.com (Disclaimer: This is one of my web sites.)

2. Bell Labs Reports on Progress Towards "Dick Tracy" Watch

3. Check Out a Watch Dick Tracy Would Envy

4. IBM stuffs Linux into "Dick Tracy's watch"

5. A User Interface Toolkit for a Small Screen Device

6. Is Timing Ripe for Wrist PDAs?

When fax machines were first introduced in the 1980s, several big companies planned new fax-delivery services. In 1984, visionary FedEx CEO Frederick Smith introduced a service called ZapMail that he hoped would replace jet fuel with ink toner. The plan: FedEx would buy the then-pricey fax machines and place them in every FedEx office. Customers who wanted to send a fax would have FedEx pick up their documents and bring them to a local office. Within the hour, the documents would then be faxed to the FedEx office closest to the recipient. FedEx would put the fax in an envelope and hand-deliver the service.

At the time, it made sense. ZapMail began as a value-added service that leveraged FedEx's core strength--reliably delivering information overnight. It also saved customers the trouble of installing and maintaining expensive equipment. But ZapMail ultimately failed as the price of fax machines plummeted. Rather than pay someone else to send a fax, businesses just bought their own machines. FedEx shuttered ZapMail only 12 months after the launch--and $190 million in losses.

ZapMail may prove a cautionary tale for Cometa. Right now, Wi-Fi seems like a new, whiz-bang technology that requires corporate oversight. But in time, business users and individuals may not see the need to pay someone for Wi-Fi service. After all, bandwidth is sold at a flat monthly rate. That means there's no cost difference to a hotel, restaurant, or public park if 1,000 or 100,000 people log on to their network.

"This is a corporate land grab. Ultimately, though, users may realize they can make this work on their own," predicts Dewayne Hendricks, CEO of the California-based Dandin Group, which promotes wireless technology in remote areas. That would be good news for Wi-Fi. But bad news for Cometa.

Let's give Ms. Black credit for coming up with the ZapMail analogy first. Shirky may have thought of it on his own, or he may have borrowed consciously or unconsciously from this earlier article.

Quote from the U.S. Defense advanced Research Projects Agency:

"The goal of the Total Information Awareness (TIA) program is to revolutionize the ability of the United States to detect, classify and identify foreign terrorists -- and decipher their plans -- and thereby enable the U.S. to take timely action to successfully preempt and defeat terrorist acts."

They want to, quote: "identify foreign terrorists" - what rubbish. They KNOW you are American citizen, not even a suspect foreigner - yet want to know what you buy, where you travel - everything. They want to profile you, like a criminal. I find it hard to believe that U.S. politicians are that dumb - to go along with this violation of the American Peoples Rights. Looks like TIA initials stand for Totally Ignorant Acceptance (of propaganda).

I have said this many times - and have yet to hear reasoned argument against it:->

Ask Security Services in the US, UK, Indonesia (Bali) or anywhere for that matter, to deny this:

Internet surveillance, using Echelon, Carnivore or back doors in encryption, will not stop terrorists communicating by other means - most especially face to face or personal courier.

Terrorists will have to do that, or they will be caught!

Perhaps using mobile when absolutely essential, saying - Meet you in the pub Monday (meaning, human bomb to target A), or Tuesday (target B) or Sunday (abort).

The Internet has become a tool for government to snoop on their people - 24/7.

The terrorism argument is a dummy - total bull*.

INTERNET SURVEILLANCE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO STOP TERRORISTS - THAT IS SPIN AND PROPAGANDA

This propaganda is for several reasons, including: a) making you feel safer b) to say the government are doing something and c) the more malicious motive of privacy invasion.

Government say about surveillance - you've nothing to fear - if you are not breaking the law

This argument is made to pressure people into acquiescence - else appear guilty of hiding something illegal.

It does not address the real reason why they want this information (which they will deny) - they want a surveillance society.

They wish to invade your basic human right to privacy. This is like having somebody watching everything you do - all your personal thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them.

This is everything - including phone calls and interactive TV. Quote from ZDNET: Whether you're just accessing a Web site, placing a phone call, watching TV or developing a Web service, sometime in the not to distant future, virtually all such transactions will converge around Internet Protocols.

"Why should I worry? I do not care if they know what I do in my own home", you may foolishly say. Or, just as dumbly, "They will not be interested in anything I do".

This information will be held about you until the authorities need it for anything at all. Like, for example, here in UK when government looked for dirt on individuals of Paddington crash survivors group. It was led by badly injured Pam Warren. She had over 20 operations after the 1999 rail crash (which killed 31 and injured many).

This group had fought for better and safer railways - all by legal means. By all accounts a group of fine outstanding people - with good intent.

So what was their crime, to deserve this investigation?

It was just for showing up members of government to be the incompetents they were.

As usual, government tried to put a different spin on the story when they were found out. Even so, their intent was obvious - they wanted to use this information as propaganda - to smear the character of these good People.

Our honourable government would rather defile the character of its citizens - rather than address their reasonable concerns.

The government arrogantly presume this group of citizens would not worry about having their privacy invaded.

They can also check your outgoings match your income and that you are paying enough tax. What do you think all this privacy invasion is for? The War on Terrorism? You poor dupe.

All your finances for them to scrutinize; heaven help you if you cannot account for every cent.

The authorities try make everything they say sound perfectly reasonable.

e.g. Officials from US Defence Department agency have said that they want, the same level of accountability in cyberspace that we now have in the physical world.

Do government currently keep records of everything that you touch in the physical world to analyse?

No they do not. So then, is that the same level of accountability?

They wish to keep an electronic tag on you, like some kind of animal. Actually it is even worse than this - like some pervert sex offender - a child molester that they have to keep track of. Would any person of intelligence call that accountability?

Do not believe the lies of Government - even more of your money spent on these measures will not protect us from terrorists. Every argument they use is subterfuge - pure spin.

Here in UK, the RIP Act is unjust - dim-witted ill-informed MPs believed governments 'experts'. Remember - they will get everything about you, your phone calls, emails, TV viewing - everything. It would be like having a spy living in your house.

Americans - the Total Information Awareness plan, USA Patriot act and Homeland Defence - you are more technologically aware, are you really that easily misled?

Garry Anderson

P.S. Did you know the the United States Department of Commerce and United Nations World Intellectual Property Organization LIED, when they said there was no solution to trademark conflict with domain names?

They are dishonourable cowards. The UN Organization, who deal with these conflicts, use WIPO.org - I use VERY similar URL - please visit.

This reminds me about the excellent case-study about Oregon hydraulics, which was recently published. Thought GPL'ed software was free, too, until they got that call from the FSF lawyers...

But 802.11g is also backwards compatible with 802.11b (11Mbps at 2.4GHz) and 802.11a (54Mbps at 5GHz.)

Read up on all the specs for the different 802.11 standards at ZDnet.

-Berj

Didn't support implmentations of more advanced scripting tools like perl or python.

Do a little more research before you make statements like that. MSFT put money forward to assist with porting Perl to Windows. See http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/stories/news/0,4153,10 14909,00.html

The whole point of the .NET vs Mono article was that Mono faces an uphill battle. They don't even have so much as any formal working relationship, and (as the original article mentioned):

Mono also implements parts of .NET that have NOT been submitted to ECMA and ISO standards. Those parts of Mono lack even the protection for IP infringement with re-implementation that ISO documentation licensing implies.

bhocop.zip

thor

Ask Security Services in the US, UK, Indonesia (Bali) or anywhere for that matter, to deny this:

Internet surveillance, using Echelon, Carnivore or back doors in encryption, will not stop terrorists communicating by other means - most especially face to face or personal courier.

Terrorists will have to do that, or they will be caught!

Perhaps using mobile when absolutely essential, saying - "Meet you in the pub Monday" (human bomb to target A), or Tuesday (target B) or Sunday (abort).

The Internet has become a tool for government to snoop on their people - 24/7.

The terrorism argument is a dummy - total bull*.

INTERNET SURVEILLANCE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO STOP TERRORISTS - THAT IS SPIN AND PROPAGANDA

This propaganda is for several reasons, including: a) making you feel safer b) to say the government are doing something and c) the more malicious motive of privacy invasion.

Government say about surveillance - "you've nothing to fear - if you are not breaking the law"

This argument is made to pressure people into acquiescence - else appear guilty of hiding something illegal.

It does not address the real reason why they want this information (which they will deny) - they want a surveillance society.

They wish to invade your basic human right to privacy. This is like having somebody watching everything you do - all your personal thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them.

This is everything - including phone calls and interactive TV. Quote from ZDNET: "Whether you're just accessing a Web site, placing a phone call, watching TV or developing a Web service, sometime in the not to distant future, virtually all such transactions will converge around Internet protocols."

"Why should I worry? I do not care if they know what I do in my own home", you may foolishly say. Or, just as dumbly, "They will not be interested in anything I do".

This information will be held about you until the authorities need it for anything at all. Like, for example, here in UK when government looked for dirt on individuals of Paddington crash survivors group. It was led by badly injured Pam Warren. She had over 20 operations after the 1999 rail crash (which killed 31 and injured many).

This group had fought for better and safer railways - all by legal means. By all accounts a group of fine outstanding people - with good intent.

So what was their crime, to deserve this investigation? It was just for showing up members of government to be the incompetents they were.

As usual, government tried to put a different spin on the story when they were found out. Even so, their intent was obvious - they wanted to use this information as propaganda - to smear the character of these good people.

Our honourable government would rather defile the character of its citizens - rather than address their reasonable concerns.

The government arrogantly presume this group of citizens would not worry about having their privacy invaded.

They can also check your outgoings match your income and that you are paying enough tax. What do you think all this privacy invasion is for? The War on Terrorism? You poor dupe. All your finances for them to scrutinize; heaven help you if you cannot account for every cent.

The authorities try make everything they say sound perfectly reasonable.

e.g. Officials from US Defence Department agency have said that they want, "the same level of accountability in cyberspace that we now have in the physical world".

Do government currently keep records of everything that you touch in the physical world to analyse?

No they do not - So then, is that the same level of accountability?

They wish to keep an electronic tag on you, like some kind of animal. Actually it is even worse than this - like some pervert sex offender - a child molester that they have to keep track of. Would any person of intelligence call that accountability?

Do not believe the lies of Government - even more of your money spent on these measures will not protect us from terrorists. Every argument they use is subterfuge - pure spin.

In UK, the RIP Act is unjust - dim-witted ill-informed MPs believed governments 'experts'. Remember - they will get everything about you, your phone calls, emails, TV viewing - everything. It would be like having a spy living in your house.

Americans - the Total Information Awareness plan, USA Patriot act and Homeland Defence - you are more technologically aware, are you really that easily misled?

I cannot stress enough - all your personal thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them. I know from experience, as fact, they have no morals and will purposefully twist this information to use against you. I have documentary evidence of this - actual government agency case notes. Should government take legal action to deny that they pervert how personal information is used, then these documents may be viewed in a court of Law.

P.S. The United Nations World Intellectual Property Organization and the United States Department of Commerce are hiding the simple solution to trademark and domain name problem. The solution was ratified by honest attorneys. Please visit my site - not associated with United Nations WIPO.org. The United Nations WIPO deal with these conflicts - but are without honour and too cowardly to directly answer my easy questions (as are the US DoC).

Quote from DARPA: "The goal of the Total Information Awareness (TIA) program is to revolutionize the ability of the United States to detect, classify and identify foreign terrorists - and decipher their plans - and thereby enable the U.S. to take timely action to successfully preempt and defeat terrorist acts."

What a load of bull*. Why has NOBODY asked the Security Services the following? I have posted this argument several times before.

Ask Security Services in the US, UK, Indonesia (Bali) or anywhere for that matter, to deny this:

Internet surveillance, using Echelon, Carnivore or back doors in encryption, will not stop terrorists communicating by other means - most especially face to face or personal courier.

Terrorists will have to do that, or they will be caught.

Perhaps using mobile when absolutely essential, saying - "Meet you in the pub Monday" (human bomb to target A), or Tuesday (target B) or Sunday (abort).

The Internet has become a tool for government to snoop on their people - 24/7.

The terrorism argument is a dummy - total bull*.

INTERNET SURVEILLANCE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO STOP TERRORISTS - THAT IS SPIN AND PROPAGANDA

This propaganda is for several reasons, including: a) making you feel safer b) to say the government are doing something and c) the more malicious motive of privacy invasion.

Government say about surveillance - "you've nothing to fear - if you are not breaking the law"

This argument is made to pressure people into acquiescence - else appear guilty of hiding something illegal.

It does not address the real reason why they want this information (which they will deny) - they want a surveillance society.

They wish to invade your basic human right to privacy. This is like having somebody watching everything you do - all your personal thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them.

This is everything - including phone calls and interactive TV. Quote from ZDNET: "Whether you're just accessing a Web site, placing a phone call, watching TV or developing a Web service, sometime in the not to distant future, virtually all such transactions will converge around Internet protocols."

"Why should I worry? I do not care if they know what I do in my own home", you may foolishly say. Or, just as dumbly, "They will not be interested in anything I do".

This information will be held about you until the authorities need it for anything at all. Like, for example, here in UK when government looked for dirt on individuals of Paddington crash survivors group. It was led by badly injured Pam Warren. She had over 20 operations after the 1999 rail crash (which killed 31 and injured many).

This group had fought for better and safer railways - all by legal means. By all accounts a group of fine outstanding people - with good intent.

So what was their crime, to deserve this investigation? It was just for showing up members of government to be the incompetents they were.

As usual, government tried to put a different spin on the story when they were found out. Even so, their intent was obvious - they wanted to use this information as propaganda - to smear the character of these good people.

Our honourable government would rather defile the character of its citizens, rather than address their reasonable concerns.

The government arrogantly presume this group of citizens would not worry about having their privacy invaded.

They can also check your outgoings match your income and that you are paying enough tax. What do you think all this privacy invasion is for? The War on Terrorism? You poor dupe. All your finances for them to scrutinize; heaven help you if you cannot account for every cent.

The authorities try make everything they say sound perfectly reasonable.

e.g. Officials from US Defence Department agency have said that they want, "the same level of accountability in cyberspace that we now have in the physical world".

Do government currently keep records of everything that you touch in the physical world to analyse?

No they do not - So then, is that the same level of accountability?

They wish to keep an electronic tag on you, like some kind of animal. Actually it is even worse than this - like some pervert sex offender that they have to keep track of. Would any person of intelligence call that accountability?

Do not believe the lies of Government - even more of your money spent on these measures will not protect us from terrorists. Every argument they use is subterfuge - pure spin.

In UK, the RIP Act is unjust - dim-witted ill-informed MPs believed governments 'experts'. Remember - they will get everything about you, your phone calls, emails, TV viewing - everything.

Americans - the Total Information Awareness plan, USA Patriot act and Homeland Defence - you are more technologically aware, are you really that easily led?

I cannot stress enough - all your personal thoughts, hopes and fears will be open to them. I know from experience, as fact, they have no morals and will purposefully twist this information to use against you. I have documentary evidence of this - actual government agency case notes. Should government take legal action to deny that they pervert how personal information is used, then these documents may be viewed in a court of Law.

P.S. The United Nations World Intellectual Property Organization and the United States Department of Commerce are hiding the simple solution to trademark and domain name problem. The solution was ratified by honest attorneys. Please visit my site - not associated with United Nations WIPO.org. The United Nations WIPO deal with these conflicts - but are without honour and too cowardly to directly answer my easy questions (as are the US DoC).