Slashdot Mirror


RMS to Move Into Bill Gates Building Today

In anonymous reader writes "RMS will be moving his office to the new William H. Gates building at MIT's Stata Center starting today. This marks the end of MIT's use of building NE43, which housed the LCS and AI labs (now combined into CSAIL). On a strangely unrelated note, shortly after Harvard, in a laudable attempt to retain solidarity with the Open Source community, dedicated the Maxwell Dworkin building (named after Gates' and Ballmer's mothers respectively), Gates' credit card was hacked. After all, they did have his mother's maiden name... "

645 comments

  1. irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    ah the irony is just to delicous

    1. Re:irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Why do all the rich schools get all the money? It really pisses of because our poor, which is quite a good school in terms of education it provides, is always in need of money. Hay Mr. Gates, spread the wealth and give a little to poor schools.

      p.s. I've seen quite a few MIT and Harvard students in practice and let me tell you, they weren't as good as advertised.

    2. Re:irony by Maestro4k · · Score: 1
      • Why do all the rich schools get all the money? It really pisses of because our poor, which is quite a good school in terms of education it provides, is always in need of money. Hay Mr. Gates, spread the wealth and give a little to poor schools.
      Because mostly those that end up successful enough to give large donations to schools generally were already well-off and went to the rich schools to start with. That's not to say poorer schools offer lesser education, just that that's why things happen the way they do.
    3. Re:irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, how do you do you know he hasn't contributed to poor schools?

    4. Re:irony by VampireByte · · Score: 3, Funny

      Well, you can't spell "Hey" for starts.

      --

      Run and catch, run and catch, the lamb is caught in the blackberry patch.

    5. Re:irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because I haven't seen any stories about the new William & Miranda Gates Science Center opening at Langston University in Oklahoma. All of this smacks of racism!

    6. Re:irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You Say Tomato. I Say Tomahto. STFUA! I say Hey like it sounds...Hay...you know in a manly way.

    7. Re:irony by pilgrim23 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Query: does the Bill Gates Building have....Windows?

      --
      - Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.
    8. Re:irony by DennisInDallas · · Score: 2, Funny

      "too" delicous, but yes... ironic just the same. I await in inevitable poetic justice with baited breath

    9. Re:irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bated breath.
      delicious

      I think the irony is thickest when a post correcting a spelling error contains two.

    10. Re:irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, only $3.6 Billion to World Health. That Racist!

    11. Re:irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. They can't be opened and break very easily.

    12. Re:irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please take two seconds and google for "Bill Gates donations" or something along these lines and you'll find that he's probably given on the order of $50M to public schools and libraries in the last 10 years, not to mention hundreds of millions toward worldwide vaccination and so many other things. The Bill & Melinda Gates foundation is heavily funded and giving gobs of money away to good causes.

  2. What other Gates buildings are there? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There's MIT, Stanford... anywhere else that Billy has seen fit to leave his mark?

    1. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      ... named after Gates' and Ballmer's mothers respectively

      Even their mothers have buildings named after them! This is insane.

    2. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by Maestro4k · · Score: 5, Funny
      • There's MIT, Stanford... anywhere else that Billy has seen fit to leave his mark?
      The DOJ in Washington, DC?
    3. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by bgeer · · Score: 5, Funny
      The Gates of Hell?

      "Abandon all hope ye who use Outlook Express"

    4. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know. I'd kinda, maybe, somewhat sorta assume there's one at the Microsoft campus. But I'm just guessing.

    5. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That bridge in SanFran?

    6. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's the entrance.

    7. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by sTalking_Goat · · Score: 5, Funny

      I saw him pissing on the side of the Supreme Court Building in DC a few weeks back...

      --

      My days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle...

    8. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      University of Washington, of course.

    9. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by trick-knee · · Score: 1

      anywhere else that Billy has seen fit to leave his mark?

      I hate to user the word in this context, but libraries...

    10. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by zulux · · Score: 5, Funny


      Even their mothers have buildings named after them! This is insane.


      That's because they can't name the buildings after their fathers. It wouldn't look good to name the building "UPS-Man and Pool-Boy Building."

      --

      Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.

    11. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by lantius · · Score: 2, Informative
      + Washington:
      http://www.law.washington.edu/GatesHall/

      Actually, that's Gates, Sr. He's not exactly a poor man at all.

      On the other hand, we also have:

      +Washington
      http://www.washington.edu/classroom/EventReservati ons/mgh.html

      +Washington (in the Paul G. Allen CSE building)
      http://www.cs.washington.edu/building/tour/05_gate s_commons.html

      Of course, it's no surprise. Just about every building on campus is named after fantastically wealthy people. Gates is just the newest generation, and others will come after. If all it takes to get money for facilities is to slap somebody's name on it - then I'm all for that.

    12. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Allen-Gates Hall, at Bill's high school (see the lower-left corner).

    13. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      anywhere else that Billy has seen fit to leave his mark?

      People in Madina ocasionally see him out around the fence line takin' a whiz...

      --
      "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
    14. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      CMU doesn't have a Bill Gates building. But maybe they don't want one.

    15. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by frostman · · Score: 3, Funny

      The Gates of Hell?

      That's at Stanford.

      --

      This Like That - fun with words!

    16. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude... fucking funny. I'm mopping coffee outta my keyboard right now.

    17. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by Foggiano · · Score: 1

      In addition to the aforementioned William H. Gates Hall, the University of Washington also has:

      - Mary Gates Hall

      - The brand new Paul G. Allen Center for Computer Science and Engineering.

      The UW has also recently started construction of a new Genome Sciences Building that was funded in large part by a donation from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

    18. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      University of Washington:

      Mary Gates Hall (ugrad center)
      William H. Gates Hall (law)
      Paul G. Allen Center for Computer Science and Engineering, which may be named after someone else, but there's Gates-named stuff inside.

    19. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You all forgot the allen library:

      Designed by Edward Larrabee Barnes, it is named for Kenneth S. Allen, associate director of libraries from 1960 to 1982.

      Allen's son Paul, cofounder of Microsoft, donated $10 million in his father's name, of which $8 million supports a permanent endowment for the library. The library contains 25 miles of shelving space and was built with about 400,000 bricks.

    20. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by the+gnat · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Gates is just the newest generation, and others will come after. If all it takes to get money for facilities is to slap somebody's name on it - then I'm all for that.

      I grew up in Seattle, and Gates' mother is rememebered quite fondly; there's a Mary Gates drive not far from my parents' house and the university. I think she was very involved in assorted philanthropic causes. So if Gates wants to name stuff after his mom, good for him. And, more generally, if he wants to donate to university CS departments, more power to them. Any quality university - or at least one with gobs of money already, like Harvard or MIT - will continue to make its own decisions, and not let big donors tell them what software to use. (No, really - Yale notoriously turned down or returned large donations because the donors wanted too much control over how it was spent. This was before Yale was quite as rich as it is now.)

      People do need to remember, however, that Gates isn't exactly a self-made man; he had pretty big helping hand from mommy and daddy, and went to the nicest private school in Washington state.

    21. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by perlchild · · Score: 2, Funny

      = University Building Monopoly !!!!

      Not quite, but the smaller universities may not have a dedicated comp sci building, and it makes no sense for Bill Gates to fund a math building does it? We'd figure out how much money he "really" has...

      ok, puny humor this morning I should know better than to attempt this before coffee

    22. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by jazman_777 · · Score: 3, Informative
      If all it takes to get money for facilities is to slap somebody's name on it - then I'm all for that.

      That's about it. I was at Georgia Tech, and a buddy asked the President of the school at the opening of a new building, not yet named after someone, 'what would it take to get my name up there?' The answer was $X (can't recall the amount, maybe $500,000).

      --
      Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
    23. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This isn't funny. Why the heck is this funny?

      Stupid...quit modding things funny just 'cause they make fun of Gates. Geez.

    24. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by arivanov · · Score: 1

      Nope, of Chaos. WTF else do you expect from someone who is supposedly a closed relative to someone called Dworkin...

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
    25. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don Knuth has his office in the Stanford Gates building.

    26. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's normal, simply marking his territory

    27. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stallman and Torvald get ribbed and you don't
      say a word. But make fun of Gates and you get
      all indignant.

      Step away from the keyboard Bill and go back to work.

    28. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. Michigan Tech is in Houghton, some 500 miles north and west of Ann Arbor, home of Michigan (aka The University of Michigan). How you get Southern Indiana right and this wrong, I don't understand. Michigan Tech is also not to be confused with Michigan State, Northern Michigan, Central Michigan, Western Michigan, or Eastern Michigan. (Don't ask what happened to Southern Michigan...)

      2. Having attended MTU and having played tennis in the Gates center, I seriously doubt it was paid for by or named after Bill Gates. MTU does love building though, and there isn't currently a CS building, so perhpas they should give him a call.

    29. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      doj used to have "gates taskforce headquarter", but bush nixed it, i think.

    30. Re:What other Gates buildings are there? by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 1

      OH COME ON! Flamebait? It's an old guy joke! If you've ever lived out on some acrage, you know what I mean. Walk your property line, have a smoke, take a pee on a fence post!

      --
      "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
  3. As a former playground bully, I want to know by potcrackpot · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... is the 'w' in 'Dworkin' silent?

    1. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by GoofyBoy · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Its her middle name.

      http://www.deas.harvard.edu/aboutdeas/ourcampus/ de asbuildsandmaps/maxwelldworkin/mdbiographies/#beat rice

      When you make jokes at someone's mother its a petty thing to do.

      What's your mother's name?

      --
      The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
    2. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 2, Funny

      When you make jokes at someone's mother its a petty thing to do.

      Yes, playground bullies are indeed petty. Thanks for the insight!

    3. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My mother's maiden name means "fat" in her language.

    4. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I had a teacher in HS that was married to a man with the name "Harry Dick".

      Everyone had a great time with that.

    5. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by Lovepump · · Score: 1

      Miss Chokesondick... she was a teacher.

    6. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Interesting. The vice principal at my junior high school was named Dick Harry Brown. Of course he was known as Brown Hairy Dick to the students.

    7. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's your mother's name?

      Mom... But my grandma's name is peter!!1eleven

    8. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its her middle name.

      It seems that it is her maiden name, which is her former last name before marrying Mr. Ballmer. It's traditional for women (at least in the US) to take their husband's last name and use their maiden name for the middle name. She was Beatrice Dworkin when she was born.

      The same goes for the other name on the building. Maxwell comes from Mary Maxwell Gates in which the Maxwell is her maiden name.

      Speaking of names, does anyone know what the "H" stands for in William H. Gates?

    9. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Speaking of names, does anyone know what the "H" stands for in William H. Gates?

      Hitler.

    10. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by saforrest · · Score: 1
    11. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      *boop* *beep* *boop*

      *Joke and sarcasm detectors are broken. Press any key to reboot.*

    12. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by harvardian · · Score: 5, Funny

      The quick Harvard wit already picked up on that one. Everybody on campus (other than the CS majors) calls the building "Max Dork".

      I'm not kidding :-P

    13. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by b-lou · · Score: 1

      from playground bully to slashdot-reading nerd? Sounds a bit unlikely to me...

    14. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      LOL - I bet you're last name is "Dorkin" isn't it... That's why your so sensitive about this dumb little thing. LOL

    15. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by Endive4Ever · · Score: 1

      Everybody knows that it was originally the Harvard Lampoon.

      And a fine silver-spoon tradition it is for idle rich boys to frolic around and satirize the world.

      --
      ---
    16. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by dheltzel · · Score: 1
      Speaking of names, does anyone know what the "H" stands for in William H. Gates?

      "Harvard"
      They even renamed the school after him.

    17. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by mclove · · Score: 1

      Actually the CS majors call it that too, except for the ones who have offices in there. (but we all hate them anyway)

    18. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by dasuridai · · Score: 1

      As much as I hate demagogary, am I the only one that misses the Bill Gates 'Borg' icon for microsoft news?

    19. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by Mr.+Piddle · · Score: 2, Funny


      from playground bully to slashdot-reading nerd? Sounds a bit unlikely to me...

      He would bully people by taunting them with the names of all the known radioactive isotopes and chasing them while reciting all the stepping numbers of Intel CPUs. Not all bullies use fists, you know.

      --
      Vote in November. You won't regret it.
    20. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Er, the CS majors call it Max Dork too....

    21. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by cavebear42 · · Score: 1

      The same as the H. in Jesus H. Christ?

    22. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by Andreas(R) · · Score: 1

      I really laughed out loud from this one :)

    23. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by Andrewkov · · Score: 1

      I knew a guy named Richard Head once...

    24. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by gnu-generation-one · · Score: 1

      "Speaking of names, does anyone know what the "H" stands for in William H. Gates?"

      Hologram.

    25. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by Bingo+Foo · · Score: 1

      Not a real playground bully, but all of his D&D characters are playground bullies. (except the female ones, which are Lara Croft clones.

      --
      taken! (by Davidleeroth) Thanks Bingo Foo!
    26. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by Frizzle+Fry · · Score: 1

      I never heard anyone other than a cs concentrator use that name, and even among us it was rare. I tried to do what I could to popularize it because I always thought it was pretty clever.

      --
      I'd rather be lucky than good.
    27. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by rastos1 · · Score: 1

      Henry

    28. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, that's Harold.

    29. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by byolinux · · Score: 1

      When you make jokes at someone's mother its a petty thing to do.

      Your mum.

    30. Re:As a former playground bully, I want to know by cavebear42 · · Score: 1

      A Natural Born Killers reference?

  4. Use punctuation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Harvard, in a laudable attempt to retain solidarity with the Open Source community, dedicated the Maxwell Dworkin building (named after Gates' and Ballmer's mothers respectively)

    How does this attempt to retain solidarity with the OSS community? The entire post is one gigantic run-on sentence, so maybe I am not reading it correctly?

    1. Re:Use punctuation by agoliveira · · Score: 4, Funny

      Hmmm... maybe it's a typo because I read it as "Harvard, in a laughable attempt..." :)

      --
      Scientia est Potentia
    2. Re:Use punctuation by Savatte · · Score: 5, Funny

      dude this is slashdot we dont use any types of punctuation marks because we are too busy coding where do you think you are elementary school

    3. Re:Use punctuation by -tji · · Score: 1

      I think he is saying it's an attempt to obfuscate the source of the money by naming the building with their mothers' maiden names. So, they don't have to have a building saying "Bill Gates".

      Obviously, the feelings of the free software community most likely did not play any role in the naming decision. It was probably requested by the donors, to honor their mothers.

    4. Re:Use punctuation by theophilosophilus · · Score: 1

      dude this is slashdot we dont use any types of punctuation marks because we are too busy coding where do you think you are elementary school

      What are you talking about ;
      I use punctuation all the time ;

      --
      Why have 1 person driving a backhoe when you could employ 20 with shovels?
    5. Re:Use punctuation by actiondan · · Score: 1, Insightful

      >How does this attempt to retain solidarity with the OSS community?

      I read the post as having a sarcastic tone in that sentence. I don't think the posting really thinks that dedicating a building to the MS founders mothers is retaining solidarity with the open source movement.

      Dan.

    6. Re:Use punctuation by the_mad_poster · · Score: 1

      I have four Perl files open right now. I have the following pieces of punctuation in them:

      ? : , . ! ;

      You CRAZY man, you CRAZY!

      --
      Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
    7. Re:Use punctuation by forkazoo · · Score: 1

      5 GOTO 10
      7 THEY LACK PUNCTUATION
      9 GOTO 30
      10 THE OP IS
      20 A BASIC PROGRAMMER
      25 GOTO 7
      30 AND FUNCTIONS

    8. Re:Use punctuation by Imperator · · Score: 1

      Because of course, punctuation marks are totally useless when coding.

      --

      Gates' Law: Every 18 months, the speed of software halves.
    9. Re:Use punctuation by TheFairElf · · Score: 1

      VB programmer eh?

    10. Re:Use punctuation by belove · · Score: 1

      ifyoureallywanttosavetimeeliminatespaces

  5. Curious by mao+che+minh · · Score: 1, Troll

    Curious that a educational institution, one that prides themselves in open research and innovative thinking, would name buildings after people whom's sole goal in the lending of money was to stop that line of thinking (I.E. influence minds to support their corporate agenda and philosophy). Sad really.

    1. Re:Curious by amigoro · · Score: 2, Insightful
      From the website in the post: Bill Gates donates $20 million for new LCS building MIT Tech Talk April 14, 1999

      Does that answer your question?

      Moderate this comment
      Negative: Offtopic Flamebait Troll Redundant
      Positive: Insightful Interesting Informative Funny

      --


      Nothing to see here
    2. Re:Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks dipshit, we already know that Bill donated money, that isn't in question. His statement was not questioning the college's acceptance of the funds, but rather their advertising that fact.

    3. Re:Curious by rgmoore · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You haven't been paying very careful attention to University naming practices, have you? Most universities will name a building whatever the donor who gives it to them says to name it. If Bill Gates wants a building name after himself, his mother, or his favorite pet goldfish from when he was six, any school in the country will oblige him as long as he's writing the check. Besides, you could easily argue that there's a certain pleasant irony in taking a big chunk of money from Mr. Gates and using it to build a facility where the researchers will be doing work that will benefit Free Software.

      --

      There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

    4. Re:Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What's sad is bill Gates has donated well over twenty billion dollars to charities, including his own and you all still bitch and moan and call him the great satan because he doesn't want you to see his source code. That's about 1/3 of his total net worth. In contrast, how much has our Vice President Dick Cheney donated to charity....a staggering 1%.

      I'm posting AC because judging by your +4 insigtful score the mods are abusing their moderation points again and I don't feel like taking the karma hit.

    5. Re:Curious by batura · · Score: 3, Informative

      Dude, its called funding. At UW (Washington), we needed a new building, which was going to run around $70 million. The state was willing to put up $25 mil, which left a lot left to cover. So, when I come in in the mornings, I go to the Paul Allen Center, cross the Microsoft Artium, go down the elevator to the Baxtor Lab (or something, I forget this part).... This in addition to the Bill and Melinda Gates Commons, numerous name plates et cetera. Yeah, its kinda wierd, but well, we have a world class building for Computer Science and Engineering.

    6. Re:Curious by inburito · · Score: 1

      A lot of the MIT buildings are named after someone. Nobody cares, since people generally refer to them by numbers. This building will just be known as 32. Since all the classes go by numbers too, people can confuse outsiders, for instance, by saying that they have a TR11 18.100B at 4-163.

      Okay, Stata center looks so ugly that people might remember its name. It seems to be Mr. Vests legacy to build ugly buildings on campus..

    7. Re:Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And let the bullshit begin. THey only lend money to destroy the minds of America, bwahahaha, so I guess apple is evil too for donating computers to education since I was in the 5th grade.

    8. Re:Curious by SnappleMaster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "taking a big chunk of money from Mr. Gates"

      Good morning, Microsoft-basher. Please smell the coffee, open your eyes, and realize that Gates has GIVEN (where do you get take from???) more money to an assortment of charities and institutions that you will ever see in your life. Yes, I know you hate him but let's face it he's a smart guy and now that he has more money than God he's pretty damn generous with it.

      --
      Be happy. Nothing else matters.
    9. Re:Curious by vasqzr · · Score: 4, Insightful


      Considering many of his 'donations' are Windows PC's and Microsoft software...

    10. Re:Curious by SnappleMaster · · Score: 1

      And we all know that Bill gets PCs for free. He pulls them out of his magic hat, right?

      Even if 75% of his donations where copies of MS software (that magically cost Bill nothing), how much does that leave? Something like FIVE BILLION in donations? How about you have a big cup of shut the hell up until you've donated a few billion to needy causes?

      --
      Be happy. Nothing else matters.
    11. Re:Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And hitler took a country on the verge of bankrupcy and made it strong enough to damn near take over the world.

      Just because someone does some good acts, doesn't mean they are a good person.

    12. Re:Curious by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      Are you a Republican or A Democrat? (This question assumes you are an American, if you are not just ignore)

    13. Re:Curious by SnappleMaster · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I am a Canadian living in America. I don't consider myself either Republican or Democrat: they're all a pack of raving idiots IMHO.

      --
      Be happy. Nothing else matters.
    14. Re:Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I'm not a big Microsoft apologist but comparing Bill Gates to Hitler?

      Comparing building an OS monopoly to killing 7 million jews?

      Wow, you're an idiot.

    15. Re:Curious by DougJohnson · · Score: 1

      Not quite true. Maybe in that country, but in my country (Canada) my school voted to turn town "Gates' blood money" to build a new building, and I don't think he even had suggested to name it after himself.

    16. Re:Curious by glwtta · · Score: 4, Insightful
      you all still bitch and moan and call him the great satan because he doesn't want you to see his source code.

      Um, no, I bitch because he's committed the rest of his vast resources to destroying my livelihood (as a software developer).

      Incidentally, are you seriously trying to make him look good by comparing him to Dick Cheney? There's a popularity contest that's hard to lose.

      --
      sic transit gloria mundi
    17. Re:Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When you have that much money, you have a social responsibility to give away money like it's on fire. If you don't, you are an asshole. That is just the way it is.

      What possible reason could somebody with tens of billions of dollars have for not donating money to people who are starving and sick? True, they don't HAVE to, they have no official obligation. However, once you reach a certain point you are just hoarding cash for no other reason than laziness or greed. Unless, I suppose, you have some secret plan to fund a space elevator or terraform Mars or something like that.

      With Bill's corrupt history, though, I wouldn't hold my breath for any amazing revelations.

    18. Re:Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No good deed goes unpunished.

    19. Re:Curious by Mr.+Piddle · · Score: 1


      For most rich people, charities are large part of a good tax strategy. This is why good financial planners know a bit about how income tax works. From Mr. Gates' business practices, I'd say he cares more about his tax liability than the people helped by charity.

      --
      Vote in November. You won't regret it.
    20. Re:Curious by rgmoore · · Score: 1

      There's more than one legitimate meaning of "take". From dictionary.com:

      1. To get into one's possession by force, skill, or artifice...

      10. To accept and place under one's care or keeping.

      They're not taking the money in sense 1, but they certainly are taking it in sense 10. I hope that you will admit that there is irony in accepting money from a rich donor and then using it in a way that may serve to undermine the source of that donor's wealth. Whether you view that as pleasant or unpleasant irony obviously depends on your view of Mr. Gates.

      --

      There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

    21. Re:Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      no, he is a troll, you idiot

    22. Re:Curious by Radical+Rad · · Score: 2, Insightful
      What's sad is bill Gates has donated well over twenty billion dollars to charities

      Gates has never donated that much to anything. It was only a few years back when he was exposed as a cheap skinflint for donating almost nothing, ever! Soon after he made a big deal out of offering ONE billion (over twenty years so that means about 50M per year) when his net worth was way over 100 billion. If I made a similar, oh so magnamimous, gesture I could beat Gates by throwing a handful of nickels to a Salvation Army Santa.

      I'm posting AC because judging by your +4 insigtful score the mods are abusing their moderation points again and I don't feel like taking the karma hit.

      No you are posting as AC because your post is a damn lie. As others have pointed out, even the actual donations that can be counted as coming from Gates are often in the form of Microsoft software (x full retail price) or PC's that come with Microsoft software pre-installed (and choosing which PC vendor to fill that contract can be used to get what you want in unrelated negotiations).

    23. Re:Curious by SnappleMaster · · Score: 1

      Do you suppose Bill gave this money without knowing or even suspecting what it would be used for?

      I don't know how smart you are, but I would think that you would be smart enough to realize that Bill isn't an idiot. He hasn't been hood-winked here.

      --
      Be happy. Nothing else matters.
    24. Re:Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      You are wrong and the other guy is right. Gates has indeed donated over $20 billion.

    25. Re:Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so, post again as AC and claim you're someone else. i think you were the original poster.

    26. Re:Curious by holzp · · Score: 1

      we have a world class building for Computer Science and Engineering.
      what makes a computer science building world class? do shiny floors make the electrons move faster?

    27. Re:Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True. Here at JHU we have some buildings called "Alumni Memorial Residence", abbreviated to AMR1 and AMR2. Basically, this is like an advertisement "Your name here for 10 million bucks".

    28. Re:Curious by bonch · · Score: 1

      Gates has been funding disease research for years, particularly in foreign countries. It's always been well-known that he's given to charities.

      Take off the "FREE SOFTWARE 4EVER D00D" blinders. This is the real world.

    29. Re:Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm afraid you're the damn lier. It's sad to see you spewing your own insecurities, envy and vitriol all over the place. You're pathetic.

    30. Re:Curious by mclove · · Score: 1

      Well it beats the universities' own name choices. Harvard's actually an excellent example, they came very close at one point to naming one of the residential Houses after the university's third president Leonard Hoar, I kid you not.

    31. Re:Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I made a similar, oh so magnamimous, gesture

      Ah, but there's the rub. Shall we hold our breath, oh great one?

    32. Re:Curious by axlrosen · · Score: 1

      Actually according to Business Week Bill Gates is the world's biggest philanthropist.

    33. Re:Curious by SlartibartfastJunior · · Score: 1

      Bill and Melinda Gates gave money for the French building here at Duke University (her alma mater), for interdisciplinary science classes. (French being her maiden name, but still a pretty complicated misnomer.) Then again, we do have the Gay Love auditorium (in the Gross Chemistry building).

    34. Re:Curious by jabberjaw · · Score: 1

      Hmm, seems that you skip over the part about him providing a great deal of funding to those who research tropical diseases such as malaria. You know, the same diseases that drug companies could develop a vaccine for yet they do not as it would be unprofitable.

    35. Re:Curious by rgmoore · · Score: 1

      The flipside is that you can have problems when the same donor wants to give multiple buildings. My alma mater has no fewer than 4 buildings donated by and named after Arnold Beckman scattered across campus. It gets annoying when you have to call them "The Beckman Institute", "Beckman Auditorium", "Beckman Behavioral Biology", or whatever rather than just "Beckman". Not to mention how confusing it gets when you have multiple donors with similar names, like Spaulding and Spalding.

      --

      There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

    36. Re:Curious by el-spectre · · Score: 1

      Duh... really good Air Conditioning...

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    37. Re:Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you better check your links dude. they seem to be pointing to some offtopic crap.

    38. Re:Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I dub this building, "Mr. Clippy Bldg."

      Err...maybe not...

    39. Re:Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      thats because they consider all donations even those involving direct personal benefit.

    40. Re:Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's donating money to promote the dissemination of AIDS pharmaceuticals, for example. Generous? The alternative, should such money not materialize, is that Africa and the world would insist on disseminating generic alternatives, thus undermining the intellectual property rights of certain drug manufacturers. That, of course, would undermine the fabric of the source of Gate's wealth. We can't have people questioning or outright ignoring the notion of intellectual property, now can we? Generous egalitarian? Hardly.

    41. Re:Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many people leave all their money to their children or other relatives.

    42. Re:Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Basically, anything is "world class" compared to the previous CS building.

      I have lots of fond memories of that building, though. Go huskies!

    43. Re:Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I teach in Maxwell Dworkin -- GUIs in Java, so irony is alive and well. In fact Harvard's Extension School program is largely taught with Java. Actually I don't think there's much irony -- M$oft gets some academic prestige/name recognition through the buildings, that's it. The place they really influence things is by funding massive research projects like the $25 million iCampus one at MIT. (See: Technology Review, April ed.)

    44. Re:Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I, have seen the MILLIONS upon MILLIONS siphoned out of school and hospital budgets to enrich Mr. Gates et al. Just last year, we paid $5000 for 75 licenses for MS Office. And you can DAMN well bet that that money could have been far more usefully employed in our poor school district, as just one of millions of examples around the world. Don't try to sell me your marketing spin about the "generosity" of M$. The great satan fits well, methinks.

    45. Re:Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, yeah, great marketing spin...I wonder how many billions have been paid by schools and hospitals around the world for licensing M$ crap? Strange how we don't hear about those numbers, eh? Oh, yes, gave "billions" away...and how many "billions" has he taken from schools, hospitals, etc.? Interesting how we NEVER hear those numbers...

    46. Re:Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft treats developers like gold.

      Well of COURSE they do. Developers are their bread and butter. Developers developing for Microsoft platforms do all of the hard work so Microsoft doesn't have to.

      They innovate, develop, and test the market by putting their livelihoods on the fickle line of consumer interest. When they do poorly, those businesses fail. When they do well, Microsoft simply purchases them. If the company can't be bought cheaply enough, Microsoft simply clones their product and pushes them out of business anyway.

      You want to see how Microsoft treats developers? I suggest you check with Lotus, Novell, Stacker, Borland, Logitech...

    47. Re:Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With the boatload of money Stacker got from MS you would be lucky to be so ill-treated.

    48. Re:Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If your school district has problems setting spending priorities, is that Gates fault? What are you doing to solve the problem?

    49. Re:Curious by Mr.+Piddle · · Score: 1

      Microsoft is trying to destroy you as a software developer?

      Probably you are not a software developer then.


      Windows is a programmer's nightmare, if that programmer understands the underpinnings of making good reliable software. Give me UNIX and sections 2 and 3 of the man pages over Windows any day. There are so many more opportunities for finding the cause of obscure bugs in UNIX than there are in Windows that it is sickening. I'm talking everything from kernel debuggers to system call tracing to kick-ass program debuggers like dbx on top of access to thorough documentation and standards-based implementations.

      --
      Vote in November. You won't regret it.
    50. Re:Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately, it'll be bad for gender equality. Richard has a habit of hitting on and frightening every women he comes in contact with.

      No, I'm not kidding. Several friends who've had gender changes considered it their coming of age when Richard hit on them: the man does tend to frighten off young women with a serious intensity.

    51. Re:Curious by Radical+Rad · · Score: 1
      Gates has been funding disease research for years, particularly in foreign countries.

      I remember that he has made small (by his standards) donations toward disease research or prevention in third world nations. Was this supposed to trick me into a knee jerk denial so that you could discredit me with a news link? How pathetic.

      There is a parable that talks of a rich man giving one of his many gold coins to the building of the temple and of a poor man who gives only a copper piece, but God loved the poor man more because the single copper piece was everything he owned. Which of the two men do you think gave more? I wonder if a Gates-fanboy can give the right answer.

      It's always been well-known that he's given to charities.

      I specifically mentioned a donation he made of $50M per year so why would you pretend to contradict me? My point was that Gates only recently started to give anything to charity and secondly that the size of his actual donations compared to his net worth are disgraceful. I do not wear blinders but I will pretend to 'take them off' for your sake if you will take off your tinfoil hat.

    52. Re:Curious by Radical+Rad · · Score: 1
      Actually according to Business Week Bill Gates is the world's biggest philanthropist.

      Congratulations on actually looking something up unlike many of the other posters in this thread, however you overlooked some crucial information. If you read the "special report" closely you will find that the amounts listed are not for donations but for monies 'given or PLEDGED'. This is not a small point. Look in the last column labelled 'Percent of wealth donated'. You can see that several persons have given or pledged much more than they own. This can only happen if they have made large pledges to be spread out over many years which is just what Gates did on his first sizeable donation and possibly all of them.

      If it still isn't quite sinking in then let me illustrate by becoming the world's most generous philanthropist myself, right here, right now, on Slashdot. I pledge to GIVE 23 BILLION DOLLARS TO CHARITY (to be spread over 23 billion years) which puts me at the top of the WORLD'S MOST GENEROUS PHILANTHROPIST list. Oh damn, that was only for 1999-2003. Okay forget it, but I think you see how it works now.

    53. Re:Curious by Radical+Rad · · Score: 1
      Oh and I almost forgot... I have written a wonderful program which I call "Hello World 2k4" which I value at 24 Billion dollars. I will donate it to the public domain for the good of all mankind so now I am the world's greatest philanthropist for 2004. Here is an excerpt:
      5 REM (C) 2004
      7 REM PRICE: $24000000000
      10 PRINT "HELLO WORLD"
      20 GOTO 10
    54. Re:Curious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And we all know that Bill gets PCs for free.

      It's a small investment to lock charities into expensive MS upgrade cycles. The first hit is free.
      Once you're on the hook, you pay the market rate.

      copies of MS software (that magically cost Bill nothing)

      You think obtaining MS software costs him something?

  6. Dworkin? by mhocker · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    So, does that mean that Ballmer is actually a 'Dwork'?

  7. how stupid by AnonymousCowheart · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How stupid can you be? In the article, it says he stole the credit card numbers to prove how insecure things were. If that wasn't enough, he emailed the info to NBCi. Why do these people think that they're the "good guys" when they do this?

    1. Re:how stupid by Maestro4k · · Score: 1, Insightful
      • How stupid can you be? In the article, it says he stole the credit card numbers to prove how insecure things were. If that wasn't enough, he emailed the info to NBCi. Why do these people think that they're the "good guys" when they do this?
      Not to defend them or to just MS-bash at random, but perhaps they were influenced by the behaivor they see Microsoft exhibiting. After all MS continues to abuse its Windows monopoly all the while claiming that all their choices for us are what the "public wants". Businesses can be a roll model too, and MS makes a very bad one. MS certainly hides behind the claim that all they do is for the public good and that they're good guys, all the while doing things that'd get the rest of us arrested for just contemplating.
    2. Re:how stupid by theLOUDroom · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How stupid can you be? In the article, it says he stole the credit card numbers to prove how insecure things were. If that wasn't enough, he emailed the info to NBCi. Why do these people think that they're the "good guys" when they do this?

      He is right though. The credit card system is ridiculously insecure, and we all pay for it in one way or another.

      There's no reason someone I buy $20 worth of pizza from should have all the information necessary to charge an arbitrary amount of money to my credit card for the next few years.

      The technology exists for us to all have keyring-sized computers which employ public-private key crypto. This would mean I would authorize a one-time trasfer of $20 to the pizza place, and in order for them to be able to charge me again, I would need to give them a totally new transaction key.

      Why isn't the credit card system being replaced? Who knows.....but it's silly and stupid.

      I should never have to give anyone my bank account or credit card number. These days, it should all be handled using transaction keys with authorize a specfic amount, in a certain direction, to a specfic account, on a certain date.

      I'm not defending this guy, I just think the current credit card system it totally stupid from a security point of view.

      --
      Life is too short to proofread.
    3. Re:how stupid by gormanly · · Score: 1

      So if you knew of an ATM machine near you, and also knew that there was no building behind it, but just a vacant lot, would you tell someone about to pay in their wages?

      If they demanded proof, you could show them a photo, but with credit card numbers the only proof is the number itself, and even knowing the number is a crime...

      What should we do? Let everyone continue using insecure services in good faith? Criminals will always know the weaknesses in such systems, so why isn't any publicity good publicity? How should the public be informed (which means passing the information in a way that makes Mr Average stop and think "this needs to be fixed before I use it again")?

    4. Re:how stupid by buzzoff · · Score: 1

      Maybe they get the idea from reading /.?

      I love the news on this site, and many of the comments are funny and thought-provoking. But, for every decent post there are two braindead posts.

      There are people here who want to see America fail, want to see capitalism fail, and want to see any powerful entity fail. Take the other guy who responded to this thread so far - He's actually relating to these kids. There is a mentality in this community that anything goes, and it is dangerous. Grown adults like these are teaching our youth that pirating music/software, hacking into corporations, and hating America are good things.

      --
      "Never tell me the odds"
    5. Re:how stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, DUH, because they prove how insecure the systems are BEFORE REAL CRIMINALS abuse the lousy security and REALLY buy everything they can with YOUR credit card info? Wakey wakey.

    6. Re:how stupid by broeman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I remember back in the late 80's and early 90's here in Denmark (some European country :P) where crackers were plenty (today there is only scriptkiddies left, thank you MS).

      Many of those got to prison for one or two years, and afterwards got a nicely paid job at a large computer security company, if they didn't start it themselves. I remember the medias always telling this, and actually indirectly encouraging more people to do cracking (or spawning even more scriptkiddies), just to prove security holes. Pretty much ironic, but these people are probably the best for this kind of job.

      Cultures like 2600, CCC, cDc are not only experimenting chaos-theories, but also contributing to more secure computing. Testing is the only way to find security lacks.

      --

      (yes this can be compared with sex)
    7. Re:how stupid by diablobynight · · Score: 0, Troll
      Here goes my karma. But your implying this idiot hacked a bunch of ecommerce sites, because of Microsoft?
      After all MS continues to abuse its Windows monopoly

      Ummm what does this refer to. I hear this crap a lot, but there is ussually no hard findings to back it up. All I normally get is IE vs. Netscape, or some reference to "The Pirates of Silicon Valley". Hard facts from a made for TV movie. lol.
      --
      Anonymous Cowards - Oh God, How I hate you
    8. Re:how stupid by SnappleMaster · · Score: 1

      "Why do these people think that they're the "good guys" when they do this?"

      Very good question. Personally while people like this say their motives are pure I think they just want the media spotlight.

      The next thing you know we'll have some nutbar hijacking a plane and buzzing the whitehouse just to demonstrate "how easy it is". People are crazy, ya know?

      --
      Be happy. Nothing else matters.
    9. Re:how stupid by diablobynight · · Score: 1

      Do you personally have any troubles with it? About 4 years ago I had a charge on there that I didn't make. I called VISA and said, hey guys, I didn't make this charge. They said, ok, took the charge off the bill and didn't pay the company. So if the company lets my card information get out that's their problem. Also I don't buy pizza with a credit card. Jesus man, don't you have an ATM near by.

      --
      Anonymous Cowards - Oh God, How I hate you
    10. Re:how stupid by diablobynight · · Score: 1

      That may be the case in your country. But in our country we take care of business. Look up Kevin Mitnick, he is trying to sell his stuff on ebay to make enough money to survive, hell he can't even keep a ham radio license.

      --
      Anonymous Cowards - Oh God, How I hate you
    11. Re:how stupid by Mmm+coffee · · Score: 5, Insightful

      For christ's sakes, must absolutely _everything_ be turned into some anti-MS rant?! Someone gets Gate's CC info and people try to spin it into being MS's fault. This is totally and completely bullshit. There are tons of serious reasons to speak out against the Microsoft, when you go off on them by trying to spin something this idiotic all you do is make everyone else who has valid points look like idiots in relation.

      Nobody cares about them being ruled a monopoly anymore becuase of the mindless drones going "Linux raa, Microsoft boo" in Orwelian duckspeak every time they open their mouths. I exclusively use a copy of GNU/Linux I built myself and even I find this crap to be aggrivating! You want to help the forces that are working against Microsoft? Shut up. Just shut. The. Fuck. Up. To say that it's Bill's fault that his CC numbers is stolen is on the same level as saying that a girl diserved to get raped for wearing a sexy dress. Asshole or not, he is the victim and not the perpetrator.

      So goddamn tired of the Linux zealots that it makes me ashamed to know I am one.... sheesh...

      Screw Anonymous Coward. Kill my karma. I don't give a fsck.

    12. Re:how stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Also I don't buy pizza with a credit card. Jesus man, don't you have an ATM near by."

      Cash is a hassle; you have to keep track of how many slips of paper you have in your wallet. Credit card? It's always right there with me.

      Plus, with my Discover and American Express, I get some tiny percentage back, so by buying that $20 pizza, I earn a few cents back.

      Not having to deal with maintaining an inventory of cash _and_ a discount on everything I buy? That's a deal in my book.

      Plus, as long as I pay my bill on time, it's free; I don't carry a balance, so I don't get charged interest.

      AND, it builds good credit for me, so I'll have a better rating when I want to do something larger (i.e. buy a house)

      So to recap:
      1) Reuse a piece of plastic, rather than having to keep track of and replenish a supply of paper
      2) Get money back. Sure, it's small, but $100 a year is better than $0.
      3) It improves my credit rating.

      Yeah, that makes me want to run to the ATM.

    13. Re:how stupid by pyros · · Score: 3, Informative

      For hard facts see transcripts of the antitrust trials. They will inform exactly which tactics made Microsoft guilty of abusing their monopoly position. Then look at the industry and observe how little has changed. Are OEM computer manufacturers allowed to ship computers with desktop icons for competitors products but not for Microsoft products? Have file formats and network protocol APIs been made freely available for interoperation? Are userland applications still being bundled into core system libraries? Are they using APIs which are not documented and thus not available to makers of competing products?

    14. Re:how stupid by Elanthius · · Score: 0

      Ever wondered where that discount comes from? That's right, Discover charges the vendor some amount for every transaction. Think those charges get swallowed by some magic black hole? No they get passed onto the consumer.

    15. Re:how stupid by Maestro4k · · Score: 0
      • For christ's sakes, must absolutely _everything_ be turned into some anti-MS rant?! Someone gets Gate's CC info and people try to spin it into being MS's fault. This is totally and completely bullshit.
      A tad overreacting to what I said aren't we? I said "perhaps" as in this is a possibility to consider, but I did NOT say that "oh it's MS's fault these guys stole Bill Gates' credit card." I offered up what I had as an interesting perspective to consider, one I hadn't seen, nor thought of before. Personally I like to consider new perspectives, look at things from a different light. If you're on such a hair-trigger that a simple "perhaps" statement qualified with I'm not defending the idiots nor wanting to MS-Bash makes you react like this, I really would hate to see your reaction to an actual assertation.

      Chill out man, you're the only one sounding like any kind of zealot here.

    16. Re:how stupid by bangular · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I've dealt with this kind of thing before.

      This is usually how the situtation goes. Grey hat hacker bored/is curious. Picks a target and goes to town. Finds security vulneribilities and emails them to whatever contact info is available. 9 times out of 10, no response. Other contact attempts usually follow and those in charge either don't understand, don't care, understaffed, or contact info out of date. The problem goes unfixed an the hacker moves on.

      This cycle goes on and turns the grey hat more and more black hat. It's rarely a pure act for the bettering of human kind, but it's rarely (except for script kiddies and 13 year olds) intentionally malicious. It's mostly for the curiousity and they are willing to report what they find. The more the hacker is ignored the more they go from simply finding areas where problems could exist, to exploiting problems. People need to stop ignoring the grey hats who report possible problems because they turn into black hats who will embarass you on the grandest of scales.

      Not saying I condone exploits in this manner, but the only thing people seem to respond to is embarassment. Then it's scape goat time. Pretending the problem doesn't exist doesn't help anyone. They are going to be punished for reporting the problem. What will this tell others? Don't report the problem. Contact parties in Russia and sell them the card numbers. Cracking down on them doesn't stop them, it just makes them uncooperative.

    17. Re:how stupid by SpaceCadetTrav · · Score: 1
      Why isn't the credit card system being replaced?

      Do you have any idea how much it would cost? Are you offering to pay for it?

    18. Re:how stupid by JWW · · Score: 1

      Then you're lucky. I got double charged, at a pizza place incedentially, in one of those new "instant check" tranactions where they just use your checking account number to get your money.

      The clerk screwed up and charged us twice. The company responsible for handling this business' transactions saw the one cancelled tranaction and put a flag on my checking account. Over a month later I get told I can't use a check at another store because of this flag. After wragling with check cashing company, talking to the accountant for the pizza place, and threatining to close all of my accounts at my bank (for failing to be of any use whatsoever), the issue finally got resolved.

      But, it was not just a simple matter. The checking transaction handling company was ready to get a collection agency. And most of the players involved didn't give a damn about me being charged double. If not for the accountant at the pizza place I would have been forced to pay the extra money or have my credit rating ruined.

    19. Re:how stupid by cellocgw · · Score: 1

      About 4 years ago I had a charge on there that I didn't make. I called VISA and said, hey guys, I didn't make this charge. They said, ok, took the charge off the bill and didn't pay the company. So if the company lets my card information get out that's their problem.
      TINSTAAFL. There is no such thing as a free lunch. The bad guy got some product for free, so the company lost money, so they jack up prices to cover, and we all pay for it. Ditto for credit card companies losing money.

      --
      https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
    20. Re:how stupid by shreak · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And this affects me how? I just might be convinced to care if the vendor passed on the savings to me for using cash, but they don't.

      And guess what. They don't want me using cash. Sure there's a 1.5% - 3% premium for using a CC, but then they don't have to manage cash in the store. This includes the risk of cashier theft, Store robbery and deposit robbery. Any CC purchase is done and paid with very little risk of theft.

      So I'll keep using my CC for all purchases, big or small. Thanks.

      Now, if the $1 coin were accepted in more vending machines I might be convinced to carry those...

      =Shreak

    21. Re:how stupid by Mr.+Piddle · · Score: 1

      I just think the current credit card system it totally stupid from a security point of view.

      True, but the credit card companies know something you dont: educating a billion people about a new technology is nearly impossible to do in reasonable amounts of time. Credit cards took years--decades--to reach the social penetration that they have.

      And still even today, decades later, people do not understand the very non-technical simple notion of what credit really is leading to an entire industry of bankruptcy lawyers and credit consolodaters. Just recently, I heard a story of a person who is 90,000 dollars in credit card debt. This isn't some chain mail fantasy, either, it is a person a person in my family knows. I wonder how people can become so deluded and so deep in denial that they will ruin their own life and their family's life just to live in a fake un-earned lifestyle created by a little magic plastic card. These problems go so far beyond security issues that security issues are really very very trivial by comparison.

      These problems run so deep with people charging dozens of things they don't need from cell phones to shitty-looking wheels for their car that I believe a second great depression will be seen in our lifetimes.

      --
      Vote in November. You won't regret it.
    22. Re:how stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A tad overreacting to what I said aren't we?

      I've seen this happen before. I think he was driven insane by having to deal with Microsoft products. Sure, he switched to Linux, but maybe for him it was too late. If you use Microsoft products, switch to Linux now before it happens to you!

    23. Re:how stupid by Maestro4k · · Score: 3, Informative
      • Ummm what does this refer to. I hear this crap a lot, but there is ussually no hard findings to back it up. All I normally get is IE vs. Netscape, or some reference to "The Pirates of Silicon Valley". Hard facts from a made for TV movie. lol.

      Well IE vs. Netscape isn't from a TV show, it's reality. Perhaps you weren't paying attention when it all happenned, or weren't on the net then, but MS really did leverage their Windows monopoly and IE to drive Netscape's business into the gutter. It wasn't just giving IE away for free, after all a free product that sucks won't always win the market-place. It was exclusive deals with OEMs not allowing them to have Netscape pre-installed on machines, it was Windows making it easier and easier to use IE, at the same time making it harder to use Netscape. Sometimes you had to hold your tounge right and hope it was the correct phase of the moon to get Netscape to be the default browser, and even then every time you applied a security update of any kind you were likely to find IE had been mysteriously changed to your default browser again. Windows at least seemed to become less tolerant of Netscape running on it, while IE was unstable and crashed a lot, Netscape started crashing MORE after MS decided they wanted the browser market. Can I PROVE that MS intentionally made Windows crash more if it saw Netscape running? No, but I witnessed the events, and found myself eventually forced to give up on running Netscape because IE crashed my computers less, not because I thought it was a superior browser. I seriously doubt that Netscape started coding their browser worse after IE was competing with them.

      There's also the current issue with Windows Media Player. Tried to find anything else out there to compete with it? Quicktime and Real both don't work quite right with formats outside their native ones. I spent a week hunting for an alternative media player with AVI and Mpeg files that I could do playlists with at one point. Even though I found one to meet my needs, it amounted to nothing more than a skin over Windows Media Player, as WMP did all the decoding and playback underneath. Media Player also conveniently doesn't support codecs other than MS-approved ones. While it will play DivX, XviD, etc, you have to put in the work yourself to find the codecs, install them, and so on. Not surprisingly most mainstream sites don't use those codecs for any video. (And I'm talking about the current versions of DivX which are legit and not hacked versions.) This quite effectively kills the market for alternate codecs. When's the last time you saw a computer from an OEM arrive with RealOne and/or Quicktime already installed? I haven't seen one yet myself, and given past history, I would not be surprised to find that MS is making sure it doesn't happen with their OEM agreements. Again I can't prove that, since OEM agreements are subject to confidentiality agreements. Handy how that works.

      Microsoft also has used its OEM agreements to try to stifle Linux, at least in the past. It did come out during the whole DOJ trial process that MS had forbid OEMs to have computers dual-boot on shipment at one point. Even if an OEM wanted to install dual OSs, the customer would have to put in the work to make it possible to boot into anything other than Windows. XP will (at least sometimes) overwrite your MBR where LILO (or whatever loader you use) is, forcing your computer back to single-boot, MS-only status. And try to buy a computer from an OEM, even a local one, without the OS on. You can get Windows on it for around $100, or you can pay around $100 labor. Either way you pay the same price for the computer, effectively making you pay for Windows even if you don't get it. I ran into this first back around 1998. The guy at the place admitted to me it was due to their MS OEM agreement. I ended up getting Windows on the machine and wiping it, I figured I might as well get the bloody software if I had to pay for it no matter what, even if I didn't use

    24. Re:how stupid by JPriest · · Score: 1

      The best statement I have read on slashdot in a while, actually.

      --
      Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
    25. Re:how stupid by Zathrus · · Score: 2, Informative

      I got double charged, at a pizza place incedentially, in one of those new "instant check" tranactions where they just use your checking account number to get your money.

      Whoa.

      Completely different from a credit card. Don't use "instant check" crap (frankly, don't use checks at all if you can help it) and don't use fake VISA/MC cards (the check cards, which are tied directly to your banking account). They don't have the same consumer protections that credit cards do. In the case of the former there's no requirements for any consumer protection whatsoever. Double charge? Too damn bad. Overcharge? That's nice. Bad information reported? Well, you can fight that one, but have fun! In all cases the consumer is presumed wrong and the system infallible. In the case of the check cards, most claim to have the protections of the credit cards, but they don't. Not really. If something is falsely charged to a check card they have up to 10 working days to resolve it. In the meantime, you're out the money -- hope you still have enough to cover your mortgage, car payment, etc. in the meantime. And if, after 10 days, they rule against you there's pretty much jack shit you can do at that point.

      q[If not for the accountant at the pizza place I would have been forced to pay the extra money or have my credit rating ruined.]q

      And if this had been a real credit card transaction then they would've had to show two distinct authorizations on the account. And most pizza places have you sign the credit swipe when you get your pizza, so they would've had to show two signatures as well. (And if they don't have you sign, well, then they better be prepared for a higher number of chargebacks from the credit card company). See the difference yet?

    26. Re:how stupid by matt4077 · · Score: 1

      funny how i see at least 3 'mod me down, i dont care' posts at +5 in every thread....

      Well, maybe it's because I read at +5 and therefore dont see the k -1 posts.

    27. Re:how stupid by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1
      I called VISA and said, hey guys, I didn't make this charge. They said, ok, took the charge off the bill and didn't pay the company. So if the company lets my card information get out that's their problem.

      And we all pay for that credit card fraud, in the form of higher fees and interest rates.

      What, you think your Visa issuer is going to cover the cost of the fraud out of the goodness of their hearts? Nope. They spread it around to all of us.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    28. Re:how stupid by Maudib · · Score: 1

      Winamp is a pretty good alt media player on windows. Handles avi, mpg, wmf, etc just fine.

    29. Re:how stupid by tarius8105 · · Score: 1

      Sure, just let me get my credit card...

    30. Re:how stupid by LinuxHam · · Score: 1

      Do you have any idea how much it would cost? Are you offering to pay for it?

      No, but Bill could. And he's been defrauded by the system, too.

      --
      Intelligent Life on Earth
    31. Re:how stupid by geoffspear · · Score: 1
      Do you personally have any troubles with it? About 4 years ago I had a charge on there that I didn't make. I called VISA and said, hey guys, I didn't make this charge.

      Or if you're a Citibank customer, even if you're not in Soviet Russia, credit card company calls you.

      No, really. Someone with an IP address in Armenia tried to buy something online with my Citibank card, and they called me to see if it was really me. Of course, if I had been in Armenia, they probably wouldn't have been able to get in touch with me very easily.

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
    32. Re:how stupid by Stephen+Samuel · · Score: 1
      If that wasn't enough, he emailed the info to NBCi. Why do these people think that they're the "good guys" when they do this

      Lemme se now, NBCi probably deals with MSNBC on a regular basis... Think that the guys at MSNBC would pass on info about the big boss's credit card being hacked????

      All this really proves is that intelligence and wisdom really are two entirely separate attributes.

      --
      Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
    33. Re:how stupid by Draknor · · Score: 1

      TINSTAAFL. There is no such thing as a free lunch. The bad guy got some product for free, so the company lost money, so they jack up prices to cover, and we all pay for it. Ditto for credit card companies losing money.

      But it doesn't stop there - if the company jacks up prices, they lose business to competition. And if word gets out about their systems being insecure, they will lose consumer trust. So if the cost of making their CC transactions more secure is less than how much money they would lose on sales (from higher prices and/or consumer distrust), then it is rational for them to be more secure. It is economics at work - you are not just paying for the company's product or the credit card company's service, you are paying for their trust, also.

      Seems to me like the system works. If you don't like the price of something, then you find an alternative (which may include simply not getting whatever it was you desired).

    34. Re:how stupid by GreyPoopon · · Score: 1
      Just recently, I heard a story of a person who is 90,000 dollars in credit card debt. This isn't some chain mail fantasy, either, it is a person a person in my family knows. I wonder how people can become so deluded and so deep in denial that they will ruin their own life and their family's life just to live in a fake un-earned lifestyle created by a little magic plastic card.

      Credit cards didn't create this problem. They just made it easier to hide. Before credit cards, people would borrow money from friends, family and creditors. When they couldn't pay back friends or family, they would lose the respect (and maybe friendship) of them. When they couldn't pay back creditors, the legal institutions would have them taken to jail and the illegal institutions would provide some rather physical incentives for them to find a way to repay the debt.

      All credit cards add is the ability to run your debt up without anybody knowing about it until you file for bankruptcy. Consider it to be an "enabling" technology.

      --

      GreyPoopon
      --
      Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?

    35. Re:how stupid by diablobynight · · Score: 1
      Your a liar. I can buy a damn dell with no OS, with no problem and some computers ship with Linux, maybe not a dual boot, but with Linux.

      No I haven't seen an OEM bundled with quick time or real one, and thank god. Real One steals control over everything I try to open, and sometimes quick time tries to get my image files to open in quick time.

      IF microsoft allowed WMP to download divx, and xvid codecs automatically they'd probably get sued like when they packaged a java machine with their OS. They would probably love to package divx, they are in the streaming marcket with WMP not the compression market.

      WMA, well they had to make it because MP3 couldn't provide security to the file. Or wouldn't, however you want to look at it.

      You mean a distibutor tried to leverage it's market power to make sure the retailers were only installing it's product, umm that is a damn good idea, it's called sales and marketing, we do it in the damn ceramics industry, so I'd expect every other industry to do it too. Tires, oil, transmissions, electronics, car audio. No one bitches about that shit.

      Can I PROVE that MS intentionally made Windows crash more if it saw Netscape running?
      Have you seen Netscape 6 I am sure MS didn't need to do anything to help screw up that program. Netscape programming went down hill because they tried to over integrate, hell I don't want Netscape handling my news groups or mail. But it tried and the browser went downhill.

      Looking for something other than media player? Try BSplayer. But media player works well, and comes with the OS, why would i want to go to something else, I replace the stereo in my car, but I don't replace the seats if the car is brand new.

      --
      Anonymous Cowards - Oh God, How I hate you
    36. Re:how stupid by diablobynight · · Score: 1
      Actually you'll find if you ask, a lot of stores will cut you a deal for using cash, even some computer stores in my area. Also, I was just saying if you don't want everyone in the world having your credit card number don't use it for 20$ pizzas

      Also, They don't want you using credit cards. Ask them, it's a hassle.

      --
      Anonymous Cowards - Oh God, How I hate you
    37. Re:how stupid by Mr.+Piddle · · Score: 1

      Consider it to be an "enabling" technology.

      I agree with the distinction between "enabling" and "creating." The main underlying point is that people who live on credit are living a lie, where so many people are trying to "keep up with the Jonses" yet don't realize the Jonses themselves are about to file for bankruptcy. It is just so terribly sad just how insecure and envious so many people are. This could also be taken as proof that people don't pay attention to history or religion, because all of these problems have been faced and dealt with before.

      --
      Vote in November. You won't regret it.
    38. Re:how stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just a heads up about gaining credit for your purchases when you pay off the balance each month: you do not receive credit for that. As far as creditors/anyone who is looking at your credit report are concerned, by not carrying a balance, it's as though you don't use the credit card.

      You need to carry a balance of some sort to gain any kind of credit w/your purchases.

      It's one of the things I hate about credit, you need to pay for it. (By paying interest on the balance)

    39. Re:how stupid by Mr.+Piddle · · Score: 1

      Don't use "instant check" crap (frankly, don't use checks at all if you can help it) and don't use fake VISA/MC cards (the check cards, which are tied directly to your banking account).

      Well, hand-written checks do provide a hard copy signed piece of evidence that can be produced in court if necessary. However, the electronic automatic checking withdrawal stuff is a disaster waiting to happen.

      For example, my cell phone company took months to stop billing me after I cancelled my service. If I had been so retarded to have signed up for "convienient" automatic check payments, I would have been minus a couple hundred dollars and in a much much weaker position with the cell phone company about who owes what. By sending in a old-fashioned bill each month, I--not they--have more power in this whole provider-customer "relationship".

      Customers who fall for the "convenient billing" carney trick deserve what they get in the end.

      --
      Vote in November. You won't regret it.
    40. Re:how stupid by diablobynight · · Score: 1

      No, they just simply don't pay the company most of the time. Or issue a reclaim from that company.

      --
      Anonymous Cowards - Oh God, How I hate you
    41. Re:how stupid by JWW · · Score: 1

      I understand that, espically the debit card stuff, but even with a credit card I would have had to call the credit card company to get charges cancelled and wasted time there too.

      I think the original poster in this thread had a great idea about transaction keys for authorization. In my case and with a credit card too, they would have gotten only 1 key and been only able to make one charge.

      I know credit card companies are willing to eat the loss on fraud charges, but we're still paying to cover those losses through interest and other charges the credit card companies have.

      Monetary transactions in general could be much much more secure than they currently are.

    42. Re:how stupid by Com2Kid · · Score: 2, Insightful
      • Well IE vs. Netscape isn't from a TV show, it's reality. Perhaps you weren't paying attention when it all happenned, or weren't on the net then,

      Well I was on the net then. Netscape 4.x sucked, most ISPs gave out Netscape 3.x and even in the begining 4.x to all their users, but as time went on:

      • Netscape kept changing how plugins where handled. Their "centralized" page for downloading plugins was horribly unorganized and always being altered to some other unorganized scheme
      • Crashed. Continiously. Horribly.
      • Used an outdated rendering engine that required the complete page be downloaded before it could be rendered. Ick.
      • Generally sucked, was slow, unstable, and ate up RAM. This was on any platform!

      Internet Explorer in comparison:

      • Had a smaller memory footprint (more or less ^_^ )
      • Had a slimmer UI
      • Had a single unified way of installing plugins (even if in retrospect it also, years later, allowed for the proliferation of spyware and adware, oops! At least it worked at the time!)
      • Was quick to boot (yah yah so it was integrated with the OS, nobody was stopping Netscape from loading up a minimalistic framework at boot time to allow for reduced delay upon starting the program!)
      • Had a modern rendering engine

      It took the Mozilla project years to remove all the cruft that existed in Netscape 4.x (maybe it would have been better if they had started from the 3.x code instead. . . .), and just recently (within the last year and a half or so) has FireFox (and FireBird before that) been able to compete with IE for sheer speed and memory usage.

      FireFox is actually a superior browser to IE in many respect, I still use IE because I am so acustom to hitting WindowKey-E to open an explorer window which I then hit F4 to go to the URL line and enter a site address. Browser/OS integration rocks, like it or not, it IS what the users want!

      And MS has never "locked" anybody out from replacing Explorer entirely, it is quite easy to change Windows shells, in fact a number of companies specialize in doing exactly that! Nobody has created a new integrated file manager / web browser yet (or if they have, it has yet to become main stream) but MS is not keeping anybody from doing so. For all the Win9x OSs, it was a simple one line alteration to change interfaces (and in fact for awhile I had command.com as my interface instead of Explorer), and with the NT line it is just a simple registery alteration.

      • Netscape started crashing MORE after MS decided they wanted the browser market.

      Netscape 4.x sucked. Period. 4.7 sucked even more. 3.x never had problems, before or after MS entered the market. 4.x was bloatware, and even some ex-Netscape employees have said such, it just sucked.

      • There's also the current issue with Windows Media Player. Tried to find anything else out there to compete with it? Quicktime and Real both don't work quite right with formats outside their native ones. I spent a week hunting for an alternative media player with AVI and Mpeg files that I could do playlists with at one point.

      You've got to be an idiot then, either that or the WORST google user ever.

      BSPlayer solves all your problems.

      Most sane Media players on Windows use DirectShow and VFW, meaning ALL media players can play ALL formats of video, except for those formats that refuse to write a DirectShow or VFW decoder. (such as Real and Sorenson (the codec most often used for quicktime).

      Winamp also works, but I would really like a way to dock just the video window on the screen and have the rest of the interface dissapear (I think there is an option for that somewhere but. . . .)

      As it is I use Windows Media Player 6.2 (start-->Run, type in m

    43. Re:how stupid by Bourbonium · · Score: 1

      As someone who finally bought a home three years ago, I've discovered that paying off your balance is the last thing you want to do to build a good credit history. The credit analysts want to know how well you handle debt and if you pay your balance every month, you won't have any. Thus, your credit rating will be very low unless you have a large debt load and you pay it off on time and are reliable with your installments.

      I couldn't even qualify for a VISA back in the 1980s until I bought a new car. I couldn't even have bought that car without someone with a credit history to co-sign the loan for me. Once we had paid half the car loan back, we were inundated with credit card offers. We had some of the best credit going, and naturally, ended up with a large credit card debt. Then, of course, we couldn't afford the down payment for a house.

      Finally, after paying off three credit cards, we kind of balanced our debt load and got another credit check. That proved we were "credit worthy" and we finally qualified for a home loan. But our financial analyst said if we'd paid off all our credit cards, our credit rating would have gone down instead of up.

    44. Re:how stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Very true. You don't build a credit history unless you carry a balance of some sort.

    45. Re:how stupid by GreyPoopon · · Score: 1
      It is just so terribly sad just how insecure and envious so many people are. This could also be taken as proof that people don't pay attention to history or religion, because all of these problems have been faced and dealt with before.

      Agreed. I make it a policy to avoid any debt that isn't self-secured whenever possible. Meaning, I won't incur debt to purchase something unless selling that something will allow me to eliminate my debt. That means pretty much carrying a zero balance on my credit cards. Needless to say, the credit card companies aren't exactly thrilled with me.

      --

      GreyPoopon
      --
      Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?

    46. Re:how stupid by Erore · · Score: 1

      Studies show that people who use plastic (CC, debit, or poker chips) for their purchases inevitably end up spending between 25-32% more than if they used cash. One of the reasons casinos give you chips. Of course, individual vary, but it really points to the fact that nearly everyone who uses plastic will spend more.

      So, you get a piddly 1% cash back on your CC purchases, but you bought 20% more than you would have with cash. You do the math.

    47. Re:how stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only if you have zero self control over your spending habits.

    48. Re:how stupid by spood · · Score: 1

      Why do these people think that they're the "good guys" when they do this?

      I think your question was rhetorical, so I'm not going to answer it. Instead, I will ask another:

      Why do people think that reporters are the "good guys" when they attempt to take a gun through airport security to prove how insecure things are?

      --
      ---- Just another spud server.
    49. Re:how stupid by Zathrus · · Score: 1

      Well, hand-written checks do provide a hard copy signed piece of evidence that can be produced in court if necessary.

      Not anymore. Very few checks are still processed manually anymore. Within 3-4 years that number will drop to zero. Instead the check is entered into an electronic system and the money is transferred by ACH. The physical check may never be used again and is often destroyed by the merchant at that point. In some cases the bank wants at least an electronic image of the check, but that's not required either.

      On top of that, writing a check runs the risk of having the check washed and someone using the washed check to initiate either an ACH or just write bad checks on your account. Now you have all the dangers of some scumbag having your account number with none of the protections.

      Write checks only when necessary. Credit cards are your absolute best bets for any kind of payment -- just be sure to pay them off in full every month. Consider them nothing more than an easier form of cash or check, not as an extension to your bank account.

      And, yes, credit cards are better than paying with cash. If someone rips you off and you paid them with cash, what do you think your odds of ever getting your money back are?

    50. Re:how stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "For christ's sakes, must absolutely _everything_ be turned into some anti-MS rant?!

      Yes. Of course.

      "Someone gets Gate's CC info and people try to spin it into being MS's fault."

      Who's else is it? Wake up! Everything is MS's fault. The sooner you get it through your thick head that the enemy of everyone in the whole world is Microsoft and everything is their fault, the sooner we can start this revolution.

      There's no middle ground between good and evil don't forget. Our esteemed leader, George Bush the Second has told us that and everything he says is true.

    51. Re:how stupid by Zathrus · · Score: 1

      I think the original poster in this thread had a great idea about transaction keys for authorization. In my case and with a credit card too, they would have gotten only 1 key and been only able to make one charge.

      So then go get a card that allows you to do that. There are several on the market right now. I distinctly recall AmEx offering single-use faux card numbers (that tie back to your real card, but only through their system). They were touted as being used for "eCommerce", but there's no reason they wouldn't be accepted for any use.

      There are also issues with reoccurring charges, with storing card numbers on merchant sites, with chargebacks (I'm sorry, that card number isn't authorized anymore...), and (most importantly) consumer education.

      we're still paying to cover those losses through interest and other charges the credit card companies have.

      Maybe you are. You know how much I've paid in interest and service fees in my life? $0. I don't carry a balance, I don't use cards that have annual fees, and when I have had an issue with a payment being applied late I've had the card company revoke the charge -- or else I'll revoke my use of their card. And, yes, I've been using credit cards for over a decade.

      In that time I've had credit card fraud exactly once -- this last December. My wife and I noticed it at about the same time our card issuer did. Account closed, new card issued, end of story.

    52. Re:how stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you don't keep up with current affairs very well do you?

      like his new book

      mitnick has a company going, two books, The last time we had lunch with him here in Denver he could certainly afford to pay his own bill. Him selling one of his old machines was a looooong time ago.

    53. Re:how stupid by Jussi+K.+Kojootti · · Score: 1
      1. You do realize that if the company was a fraud, VISA will end up taking the loss. Who do you think will pay for that in the end?

      2. "Don't buy pizza" - sure that's safe. But the grandparent was talking about an electronic payment system he could actually use. I'd like that too (instead of not bying the pizza).

    54. Re:how stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft is convincted by a biased judge. This is a very well known issue. The finding facts were determined by this biased judge. For that reason, the issue is still debatable. Not only that, the expert hired by the judge turned out to be also a biased expert. The guy was referring to Microsoft as "satan". Microsoft is not found guilty by a jury or by a judge who is not biased. The judge severely limited the ability of Microsoft to defend itself. That's how they got Microsoft.

    55. Re:how stupid by diablobynight · · Score: 0, Troll

      I didn't say dont' buy pizza, I said carry a reasonable amount of cash around with you. I hate people that use their credit cards to buy a stupid pack of gum and such.

      --
      Anonymous Cowards - Oh God, How I hate you
    56. Re:how stupid by An+Onerous+Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful
      You're mixing up your timeframes here. Sure you can buy OS-free computers right now (if you look really, really hard). But back when Microsoft was fighting the browser war, it was virtually impossible to get a Windows-free computer from any computer distributor.

      By the time Netscape 6 was released, the Browser wars had been over for years.

      "You mean a distibutor tried to leverage it's market power to make sure the retailers were only installing it's product, umm that is a damn good idea, it's called sales and marketing, we do it in the damn ceramics industry, so I'd expect every other industry to do it too. Tires, oil, transmissions, electronics, car audio. No one bitches about that shit."
      No, it's called market tying, and yes, it is illegal. Especially for a monopoly. If you want to sell computers to a wide range of customers, you have to be able to provide Microsoft Windows. If, in order to provide Windows you must sign an agreement to include Internet Explorer (and you further have to refuse to provide alternatives), then that is an illegal abuse of a monopoly by Microsoft.

      Prior to the antitrust ruling, this is precisely what they did.

      "But media player works well, and comes with the OS, why would i want to go to something else
      Why indeed? You've just demonstrated the power of a monopoly to perpetuate itself.
      --

      You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!

    57. Re:how stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hmmm...had a bit too much coffee, eh? :-)

    58. Re:how stupid by An+Onerous+Coward · · Score: 1

      You conveniently forget to mention, IE had one additional advantage: It came pre-installed on every single computer!

      You can keep your "real facts" and your Google-fu insults. None of the things you mentioned are relevant to the antitrust lawsuit; even if IE might have deserved to win solely on merit (it's not nearly as open-and-shut as you imply), it was this abuse of their monopoly position that turned the browser wars into a bloodbath.

      And since you appear to consider yourself an expert in these matters, I would point out that the 6.0 release was a complete rewrite of the Netscape codebase, and is related to the 4.x series in name only.

      --

      You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!

    59. Re:how stupid by Com2Kid · · Score: 1
      • And since you appear to consider yourself an expert in these matters, I would point out that the 6.0 release was a complete rewrite of the Netscape codebase, and is related to the 4.x series in name only.


      Microsoft was sued for practices that ensued during the so called "browser wars", which involved the 4.x generation of web browsers.

      The Netscape 6.x codebase is based upon Mozilla. Netscape 6.x and the various other Mozilla derived versions are all now serious condeners in the market place, but 4.x never had a chance.

      • You conveniently forget to mention, IE had one additional advantage: It came pre-installed on every single computer!


      And Netscape came with darn nearly every ISP startup kit that existed at the time. Hell I downloaded 4.x but never used it! The thing just sucked.

      • None of the things you mentioned are relevant to the antitrust lawsuit; even if IE might have deserved to win solely on merit (it's not nearly as open-and-shut as you imply), it was this abuse of their monopoly position that turned the browser wars into a bloodbath.


      This is what makes the anti-MS rherotic so tiring. MS has done many things that are immoral and illegal, but damnit, even my tech illiterate friends know how much Netscape 4.x sucked! As soon as I mention IE vs Netscape, one of them will pop up with "Yah but IE is better!".

      Hardly anybody mentions the entire DR-DOS fiasco, or the MS licencing contracts involving Word/Works/etc, or how they managed to get anybody to use Windows in the first place! (earth to zealots, earth to zealots, Windows 1.0-9x all sucked horribly, do some research on how MS kept managing to sell them!)

      Now that Microsoft has an actual DECENT set of operating systems for sale, it is going to get harder and harder to discredit Microsoft. Especially in many user's eyes, as we can no longer go "Hey, Windows sucks, it crashes all the time, and the only reason you have to use it is because MS financially forced companies into signing contract agreements stating they would install this crappy OS on to every computer they sell!"

      Seriously, what is the anti-MS rhetoric going to be now? "come on over to Linux, if your lucky you can get sound working"?
    60. Re:how stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, it worked for Robert Morris! He wrote the "Morris Worm" that brought much of the Internet to its knees by invading UNIX services such as unpatched sendmail, telnet, and other services in roughly 1988.

      What happened to him? He managed to avoid the jail time by having his daddy (who was head of the NSA) hand him a "get out of jail free" card and indirectly impede the investigation to find the cracker who brought research and defense networks crashing to the ground worldwide.

      Where is he now? Why, he's Professor Robert Morris of MIT and is apparently moving into the William Gates building with the rest of his department at MIT. href=http://www.pdos.lcs.mit.edu/~rtm/

    61. Re:how stupid by jc42 · · Score: 1

      I've discovered that paying off your balance is the last thing you want to do to build a good credit history... our financial analyst said if we'd paid off all our credit cards, our credit rating would have gone down instead of up.

      Right. A few years ago, the news got out here in the US that the credit industry has a term for people who pay off their credit cards every month: deadbeats.

      This is because when you do that, you're "stealing" profits from the credit companies. They make their living by charging interest on credit loans, and they don't much like people who don't take out loans by running a credit balance.

      It's interesting what qualifies as "theft" these days. We've had a few discussions here of the way the recording, movie and publishing industries use the term, applying it to cases where the theft victim still has everything that they did before the claimed theft. And the credit industry does the same thing. They consider that interest charge as rightfully theirs. When you cheat the system by avoiding paying interest, you aren't keeping your own money; you are taking money out of the paychecks of hard-working corporate executives.

      So much for the old advice to never a borrower or lender be. (Attributed to both Shakespeare and Ben Franklin. They probably both borrowed it from someone else. ;-)

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    62. Re:how stupid by jc42 · · Score: 1

      Why do people think that reporters are the "good guys" when they attempt to take a gun through airport security to prove how insecure things are?

      Maybe because in such cases, the reporters are the good guys.

      I'd much rather have them do this and report on the results than some criminal or terrorist do it.

      Both will probably cause increased airport security. But the reporters won't kill anyone.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    63. Re:how stupid by swillden · · Score: 1

      Why isn't the credit card system being replaced?

      It is.

      Everywhere but the US. The UK is currently in the process of migrating all credit cards to smart cards with a user PIN. You can find hundreds of pages of detailed technical documentation here. The cards can do a public-private key-based authentication with a card terminal, and will only do so if the cardholder's PIN is presented (which the card verifies itself). The technology is already widely deployed in France, to the point that many (most?) merchants will not accept a magnetic stripe card (more precisely, the merchant acquirers won't accept it).

      Visa and MasterCard have specified dates in the near future (a couple of years out) by which all terminals in Europe must accept smart cards and all credit cards must be smart cards. Issuers and acquirers who don't support the new technology after that point will be subject to the "Liability Shift", which basically means that the party (issuer, acquirer or merchant) who doesn't have the new tech will bear the full cost of any fraudulent transaction that touches them (currently the liability is spread around).

      Canada and Asia also have liability shift dates set, though they're a little further out, and Latin America is currently figuring out when they want to do it. Also in the works, but a little further out, is a set of international agreements that will specify liability handling in

      The lone holdout is the US. Why? Well, mostly because we have really, really low fraud rates. Not because we're all honest, but because we validate nearly 100% of credit transactions on-line. Most people in the industry fully expect the US fraud to skyrocket as the rest of the world tightens down their systems. When that starts to happen, the US will undoubtedly follow suit in a hurry.

      At bottom, the reason why the credit card system isn't being replaced in the US is very simple: Cost. Currently, fraud is low enough that it costs less to write it off than to deploy the technology to prevent it. Keep in mind that the estimates for the total cost of chip and PIN deployment in the UK approach two billion pounds, which is around $3.5 billion USD. The US market is three times as large and much more distributed, both in terms of geography and in the number of players. I haven't seen any official estimates of the total conversion cost for the US, but $15 billion is probably in the ballpark. Since fraud currently costs less than $2 billion per year, it costs less to just eat the fraud for the next 8-9 years than it does to make the investment to switch over.

      Further, the bulk of the upgrade costs fall on the merchants, and retailers are notoriously sensitive to short-term expenditures. It's not a question of just buying some smart card readers and installing them, retailers have to integrate the readers with their point-of-sale systems and train all of their staff, both of which are vastly more expensive propositions than you might expect. Offer your average retailer an investment that will pay for itself in 7 years and he'll laugh you out of his office. If you want him to listen, you'd better give him something that generates a significant return within a year at the outside. Until fraud gets much worse, and a liability shift threatens to drop all of it on their heads, it's going to be tough to interest the retailers.

      If that weren't enough, there's a genuine fear throughout all segments of the market that the first mover will lose customers because of the unwillingness of the cardholders to change a process they're familiar with for something different, even if it's better.

      If yours was a rhetorical question, well, you should know better than to do that on /. ;-)

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    64. Re:how stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Cultures like 2600, CCC, cDc are not only experimenting chaos-theories, but also contributing to more secure computing. Testing is the only way to find security lacks

      What a load of shit. That's like saying that bank robbers are contributing to better policing, and attempted murderers are contributing to better medical assistance.

      They're criminals. They're not "experimenting" with chaos "theory". They're just scumbags who would be stealing handbags from little old ladies if they hadn't discovered computers first.

      Let the fuckers go to gaol and stay there.

    65. Re:how stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Microsoft is convincted by a biased judge. This is a very well known issue. The finding facts were determined by this biased judge. For that reason, the issue is still debatable.

      No, it's not debatable, because the supreme court reaffirmed the verdict and the findings of facts when Microsoft appealed. The only thing the supreme court disagreed with was the punishment.

      Microsoft is not found guilty by a jury or by a judge who is not biased.

      You are wrong. They were found guilty by the SUPREME COURT. Many judges agreed that Microsoft was guilty.

    66. Re:how stupid by theLOUDroom · · Score: 1
      The UK is currently in the process of migrating all credit cards to smart cards with a user PIN.

      Interesting response. Europe does have some really cool things going on with smartcards. A couple years ago I was at cebit and there was what seemed to be a full building devoted to the technology.

      Unfortunately, the smartcard concept is fundamentally flawed. They had a good idea, but they didn't carry it far enough.

      The fundamental problem is that one must trust whatever smartcard reader they stick the card into. There's no way to independently verify anything, so it's almost the same as a normal credit card. There's also no way to tell if a "reader" is attempting to crack your private key.

      IMO, they should be deploying battery powered devices with displays which communicate via infrared signals. This fixes two key problems with smartcards:
      1. You can verify that they really are charging you the amount they said.
      2. It becomes MUCH harder for a rigged reader to attemp to steal your private key.


      One of the key problems with the smartcard design is that it relies on an external source to supply its clock and power supply. It is possible to manipulate these signals to cause a smartcard to give up its private key.
      This means that I could stick my smartcard into what looks like a perfetly normal smartcard reader, and in addition to completing a normal transaction, it could steal my private key, no crypto-breaking required.
      There have been attempts to deal with these problems, but I think a better approach is to avoid trusting an outside source for clock and data streams to begin with.

      Here's a pretty good link on the subject of breaking smartcard security.


      I think smartcards are a step in the right direction, but they don't offer nearly as much security as other implementations might.
      There are many more benefits the public/private key crypto could provide if they were willing to take things just a couple steps further and make the device provide it's own user interface and communitcate via a more protected means.
      One of the most important in my mind is removing the ability for a vendor to charge you an arbitrary amount of money. (There's no way for you to confirm that they really are charging you the amount they say they are before completing the transation.)
      A smaller benfit would be the ability to establish a "never give your widget to anyone rule". With an IR-link type communication, there is absoultely no reason to give up physical custody of your key. This makes attempting to steal the key from your device much harder. The onboard display would also give it the ability to say "Help someone is trying to steal my private key. Leave this area!"
      --
      Life is too short to proofread.
    67. Re:how stupid by swillden · · Score: 1

      The fundamental problem is that one must trust whatever smartcard reader they stick the card into. There's no way to independently verify anything, so it's almost the same as a normal credit card.

      Ummm... no.

      Smart cards do have security weaknesses, but what you describe really isn't a problem.

      It's not clear exactly what you mean by "independent verification", or who you're assuming wants to verify what. Because the rest of your post has a very cardholder-centric view, I assume that's what you mean here as well, and from the point of view of a cardholder the only thing to verify is the merchandise you're carrying out of the store and the dollar amount printed on the receipt. If the merchant's terminal is not real and authorized, the cardholder wins because the merchant isn't getting any money. It's the merchant that has to verify to the acquirer that the transaction is valid and correct. If the merchant can't do that, he doesn't get paid. If the cardholder subsequenty disputes the transaction, the onus is on the merchant to prove that it was correct. If the merchant gets a lot of cardholder disputes, he's not going to be able to accept credit cards any more, and he's not going to get the money he thinks should be coming to him, either.

      There's also no way to tell if a "reader" is attempting to crack your private key.

      No, there isn't, short of disassembling the reader and taking a good look at what exactly is in it -- hardware and software. However, cards are designed under the assumption that they will be operating in a hostile environment.

      One of the key problems with the smartcard design is that it relies on an external source to supply its clock and power supply. It is possible to manipulate these signals to cause a smartcard to give up its private key.

      Not with current-generation cards. The history of smart card security, like the history of any security technology, is one of a continual arms race between attackers and defenders. The attacks you describe did work a few years ago, but don't work any more. Newer attacks have been devised and defeated, several times over. More attacks will be discovered in the future, and next-generation cards will incorporate countermeasures. At no point in time will cards be completely secure, and the form factor has obvious limitations (note that lack of an internal power supply is not one of them -- there are ultra-thin, flexible batteries which can be used to provide reliable power, but they add cost without significantly increasing security), but neither have they ever been, or will they ever be, something that can be cracked by the average criminal (and it's the *average* criminal that matters, not the genius).

      Here's a list of some of the attacks that have been invented and defeated over the last decade or so:

      • Microprobing. An electron microprobe can be used to tap into operating circuits or simply disassemble the silicon to uncover the ROM which can then be read with an electron microscope. This is still possible, but newer chips place important ROM inside protective layers which makes probing very tedious. And the equipment required is very expensive.
      • Fault induction. Manipulation of environmental factors like temperature, power, clock and radiation can be used to cause transient faults in the chip's computations, which can then be exploited to extract sensitive information. Chips now monitor these factors and if they get out of spec the chips simply shut down and refuse to perform any computations at all.
      • Side-channel attacks. By monitoring the power consumption, heat generation and computation timings, it's possible to extract information about computations. Chips now employ capacitors to smooth out power consumption, dummy circuits to even out heat generation, crypto coprocessors to make calculations very fast and cool and delay circuits to introduce timing noise. The newest side-channel attack, EM field scanning, is still feasible
      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    68. Re:how stupid by Eythian · · Score: 1
      Cash is a hassle; you have to keep track of how many slips of paper you have in your wallet. Credit card? It's always right there with me.

      Live in a country that uses EFTPOS (or an equivalent), where knowing the number is meaningless. It requires swiping on a card reader (most pizza deliveries have the machine hooked to a cellphone), entering a PIN, and the money comes out of your bank account. Nothing that can be stolen without significantly more work than copying a few numbers. Not so good for doing 'remote' buying, unfortunatly. But it does mean that you can almost completly avoid cash if you like.

    69. Re:how stupid by Knetzar · · Score: 1

      The CompUSA near me was really backed up, so they opened up a checkout line for credit card only, to me it seemed as it that line was going faster. These days it seems to me that sliding a credit card and signing with the electronic pen is a lot faster then paying in cash and waiting for the cashier to figure out the correct amount of change.

    70. Re:how stupid by theLOUDroom · · Score: 1

      The attacks you describe did work a few years ago, but don't work any more. Newer attacks have been devised and defeated, several times over. More attacks will be discovered in the future, and next-generation cards will incorporate countermeasures.

      My point is that much of that whole saga could have been virtually eliminated by removing the hardwired electrical connection from the system.
      Sure they can play catch-up and eliminate them, but it would be better for the potential to not be there in the first place. There are tons of attacks made possible by sticking the card in someone else's slot that could been completely avoided.

      It's the merchant that has to verify to the acquirer that the transaction is valid and correct.

      Which doesn't really have anything to do with the security of credit cards vs smart cards. (Or vs anything else.) There are all kinds of rules like this in place because the credit card system is so weak.

      Sure smartcards work fine if they're used in exactly the same way credit cards are. The problem is that they MUST be used basically the same way credit cards are because you MUST trust all the same people and use them in the same way. So maybe you can reduce fraud a little bit, but you can't really change the system. You're still relying and the same old safeguards for many things instead of any inherent security from the use of smartcards. You have to trust more people than you should given that you're carrying around a dedicated crypto processor.

      A system like I'm talking about would give you a LOT more flexibility and security. It would lower barriers to entry to those who want to take transactions.
      In a system like I describe, it no longer has to be a big deal to accept credit card transactions. You could buy something from a nameless street vendor (or cabbie) in NYC and not worry about it, and the street vendor would actually be able to USE the system because little or no verification would be necessary.
      I would be able to buy something off a website in Nigeria without worring about them yanking money out of my checking account (many people now used "credit cards" directly coupled to their checking account.)

      The point I mean to make is that smart cards are pretty much only good for the same thing credit cards are good for while a device like I describe could be as, if not,. MORE flexible than cash.

      Right now I can't give my friend Joe $5 via credit card, directly. My idea would allow that to change.

      There IS a need for the above, and right now the niche is starting to be filled by paypal.

      A technology like I'm describing would open up all sorts of new ways of doing business: micropayments, true electronic cash (non-insured), peer to peer transfers, etc.
      It doesn't buy you a lot if you only think about doing business the same old way it's always been, but if you consider the ways a different trust model could change things then it becomes a cool idea.

      --
      Life is too short to proofread.
    71. Re:how stupid by Quill_28 · · Score: 1

      >Credit cards didn't create this problem. They >Credit cards didn't create this problem.

      They made not have created this problem, but they turned into from a small problem to a huge one.

      The amount of debt the average american has is astounding, and the cause of it is credit cards.

      Please note I am not blaming the credit cards, it is the consumers fault. But having easy access to "endless" credit has been the downfall of many people and marriages.

    72. Re:how stupid by swillden · · Score: 1

      My point is that much of that whole saga could have been virtually eliminated by removing the hardwired electrical connection from the system.

      It's not the hardwired connection that's the problem. The sort of devices you're talking about will also be vulnerable to EMF sniffing, for example, and there are certainly other attacks that would be discovered.

      Which doesn't really have anything to do with the security of credit cards vs smart cards. (Or vs anything else.) There are all kinds of rules like this in place because the credit card system is so weak.

      [Referring to the fact that the merchant has to prove the validity of the transaction to get paid]

      Again, not true, unless you move to a system where the bits *are* the money. As long as the bits are merely used to indicate the intention of both parties to perform a transaction and the actual money is moved via separate, auditable processes, the responsibility must fall on either merchant or cardholder to prove to the banks that the transaction occurred. Obviously, the merchant is the one who wants to prove it.

      Regarding bits as money, in theory this is possible, but there are lots of difficulties. Some of them are:

      • Security. Such schemes rely very heavily on the security of the devices, which means that when the devices are compromised the system as a whole may be vulnerable. That just won't fly. The system has to be resilient in the face of some amount of compromise and fraud, because it *will* happen.
      • Convenience. One of the major reasons people like credit cards is because you don't have to keep track of how much money is left (unless you're close to your credit limit, but that's a bad idea anyway). Most any cash-like scheme will suffer the same inconvenience factor as cash.
      • Regulation. Any scheme that will be permitted by governments must be accountable to them. The current system works well for them because most money movement is done bank to bank, where everything is logged and the records can be subpoenaed. Cash is only used for low-value transactions and when it passes through banks, as it must to be used for legitimate high-value transactions, large quantities of cash are reported to the FBI.

      Lots of schemes have been proposed, but none that are as secure, convenient, cost-effective and auditable as the credit card system.

      Right now I can't give my friend Joe $5 via credit card, directly. My idea would allow that to change.

      Maybe :-)

      Unless there are transaction fees in such direct transfers, it's hard to see how such a system would be paid for, unless you're talking about a pure digital cash system. You also need to think about how the government would get notified of large-value transactions.

      Did you ever use the PayPal Palm Pilot app that allowed you to beam PayPal dollars from one PDA to another? It was really cool while it existed -- very convenient for settling up a lunch bill. But it was discontinued. PayPal never really said why, but I suspect it was because it wasn't possible to secure it adequately.

      There IS a need for the above, and right now the niche is starting to be filled by paypal.

      I would say PayPal did fill that niche when they first started out, but they rapidly discovered that it's a money loser. So, they discontinued the PDA app, added transaction fees and then began gradually decreasing the amount of money you could move without incurring transaction fees, while also increasing the transaction fees.

      PayPal is an excellent counterexample, come to think of it.

      It doesn't buy you a lot if you only think about doing business the same old way it's always been, but if you consider the ways a different trust model could change things then it becomes a cool idea.

      There are all kinds of things that can be done, but the original discussion was about securing the credit card system, not about creating entirely new p

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    73. Re:how stupid by GreyPoopon · · Score: 1
      Please note I am not blaming the credit cards, it is the consumers fault. But having easy access to "endless" credit has been the downfall of many people and marriages.

      What really astounds me is that financial institutions with complete access to your credit history know exactly how much open credit you have and what your income level is, yet they continue to provide additional credit to individuals who are in debt up to their eyeballs. It is a mystery to me as to why these companies aren't taken to task for such risky investments. I don't believe in legislating the issue, but maybe if somebody established a credit risk profile for companies that back credit cards and made this information available to investors, the tune would change. I certainly would be a little hesitant to invest in a company that takes unwise risks in its own investments.

      --

      GreyPoopon
      --
      Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?

    74. Re:how stupid by theLOUDroom · · Score: 1
      The sort of devices you're talking about will also be vulnerable to EMF sniffing, for example, and there are certainly other attacks that would be discovered.

      Sure, buth the mere fact that it stays in your hand or pocket throughout the day makes EMF sniffing, thermal manipulation, electrical manipulation, EMI manipulation, etc much more difficult. In a smartcard scenario the antenna/electromagnet/whatever can get MUCH closer to the actual IC.

      the responsibility must fall on either merchant or cardholder to prove to the banks that the transaction occurred. Obviously, the merchant is the one who wants to prove it.

      My concept is not of "bits as money" but of reduced transaction costs, reduced requirements for accepting transactions, etc.
      A bank somewhere would still have my actual money.

      There are all kinds of things that can be done, but the original discussion was about securing the credit card system, not about creating entirely new payment systems.

      True, but it's nice to take the discussion to the next level. Especially since I seem to have found someone with a good understanding of the subject.

      The reason I think my idea is a good one is that, while a bank is still a part of the transaction, the costs they incurr can be vastly reduced. The recudtion in fraud would lower costs and the totally electronic processing would also lower costs.

      Since the devices would be interactive, there's no reason why I couldn't choose between a number of different transaction types.
      I could choose a one-time, no chargeback possible, cash-like transfer for buying a beer at a bar. (This would have a low transaction cost.)
      Or I could you a more tradditional, credit-card-like transfer in other cases.

      Lots of schemes have been proposed, but none that are as secure, convenient, cost-effective and auditable as the credit card system.

      I think it's more a case of momentum. I don't think the credit card system is really viewed as "perfect" just "good enough".


      I think some of the key benefits of an interactive device are:
      • Better fraud resistance
      • reduced transaction costs
      • the ability to select different trasaction types: credit accounts vs. checking, chargeback-possible vs. not, etc.
      • And the most key thing IMO is the removal of the need to police who has a "credit card" reader.

      The last item is really key. This means nobody has to spend time and therefore money checking out Jane Doe before she can accept "credit card" transactions. The processing fees would be automaticly charged by her bank and my bank. The secure nature of the system would make it nearly impossible for her to create fake transactions.

      It would be like having the ability to write and cash checks instantly, with selectable levels of fraud protection (and therefore different transaction costs).


      Here's the secenario (buying a slice of pizza):

      I'll call my credit card replacement a "token" from now on:

      1. Token and cash register exchange public keys. (All communication from this point forth is encrypted.)
      2. Register requests a one time transfer of $2.
      3. Token shows this amount and asks me to confirm or deny it.
      4. I confrim it and the token sends a message that the charge has been accepted as well as an encrpted data packet with routing information for my bank.
      5. The register sees that we have agreed on the transaction. It forwards my encrypted message to my bank.
      6. My bank gets the message and sends the money to the pizza place.
      7. The register sees that the money has been trasferred.

      I don't have to trust the person I'm buying from to keep any information safe, not to I have to trust them about the amount they're charging me.
      The pizza place gets the money almost instantly and doesn't have to worry about my not having $52in the account. They don't have to keep a signed

      --
      Life is too short to proofread.
    75. Re:how stupid by spood · · Score: 1

      OK, so what is the difference between a terrorist and a reporter in this case? Intent.

      A reporter's intent is to expose insecurity, the terrorist intends to take advantage of it.

      The hackers in this case may not originally have intended to simply expose insecurity, they may have been just curious. But in the end, they decided to expose the insecurity using the media instead of stealing and using the credit cards for a shopping spree.

      --
      ---- Just another spud server.
  8. I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by BurKaZoiD · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Gray says he is actually the good guy. He said "I just wanted to prove how insecure these sites are. I have done the honest thing, but I have been ignored."

    That's like shooting someone just to prove how unsafe firearms are.

    *shakes head*

    1. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by gantrep · · Score: 1

      Not really.

    2. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it's not, you idiot. If they'd STOLEN STUFF with the credit card info, then it would be. And you get modded up insightful for an obviously flawed analogy. Sad.

    3. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by gormanly · · Score: 4, Insightful

      4, Insightful? FFS. Using the CC numbers to buy yourself a small country might be vaguely similar, but if you think it's equivalent you're showing very little regard for the value of a human life.

      Picking up a gun you saw/found on a fairground ride and waiving it around shouting "Look, gun!" would be a closer firearms analogy...

    4. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by Bobulusman · · Score: 1

      In this case...yeah.

      He's stolen credit card numbers, and caused, according to the article, $3 million in losses. He then says it is only to show the danger of using credit cards insecurely.

      Just like the firearm example, he's doing something illegal to, supposedly, prove a point.

      --
      Cogito ergo sum in Slashdot.
    5. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by Suffering+Bastard · · Score: 1

      That's like shooting someone just to prove how unsafe firearms are.

      I disagree. Shooting a person causes real harm to that person, but copying their credit card number harms no one at all. Using that card number to purchase stuff does cause financial harm to the owner of the card, but it appears Gray did not do this.

      Punishment should fit the crime, and positive aspects to any action should be considered. Don't you think the sites he stole the numbers from will enact better security measures? You could almost argue that Gray is a martyr, going to jail for his noble pursuit of making the Internet a more secure place.

      Note I said "almost."

      --
      "Molest me not with this pocket calculator stuff."
      - Deep Thought
    6. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by LoudMusic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Gray says he is actually the good guy. He said "I just wanted to prove how insecure these sites are. I have done the honest thing, but I have been ignored."

      That's like shooting someone just to prove how unsafe firearms are.


      I disagree. Hacking is one thing, and I believe his statement is correct. However, using the information he obtained for illegal acts is just stupid. If he can hack a credit company he needs to apply for a job.

      --
      No sig for you. YOU GET NO SIG!
    7. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by Beatbyte · · Score: 1

      what? there was no damage. only facts of financial information were collected.

      how can you compare that to murder?

    8. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by diablobynight · · Score: 1

      OK better analogy. I break into a bank at night and throw all of their money into the street and then tell someone I was just proving their securety didn't work.
      This caused real harm. Do you think he got into their systems in some nice way that left them unharmed? He broke the law. It's easy to break into my house and steal all my stuff but I don't want to have to build a twenty foot concrete wall around my yard just so some jack ass doesn't do it.

      --
      Anonymous Cowards - Oh God, How I hate you
    9. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Capitalists run the world now. And by the typical rules of economics, humans are very cheap indeed. There's no scarcity of supply, since there are more than 6 billion of us. Properly maintained, they can last easily for 70+ years. Most people who want one will make their own. Acquiring a human that was made by someone else is not considered the most ideal situation. In other words, the current market for human beings is depressed. Given those facts, why on earth would you imply that the value of a human life is high?
      Come on, this isn't the 90's anymore. We've got a Republican president, and this is how capitalists set value.

    10. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by Eagle5596 · · Score: 1

      Wrong, this is more akin to pulling a firearm on someone, sticking it to their head and saying "Bang, you're dead".

      Guess what, that is illegal too, it's called brandishing a firearm, and possibly assault. You'd get tossed in prison, just like these bozos should.

    11. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no just his own foot

    12. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by diablobynight · · Score: 4, Interesting

      How do you know there was no damage? Can you not look beyond the murder part of what he said, and see that he was implying that you have no right to break a law to prove a point like this. And what point did he prove? No public system is unhackable. Just like any house can be broken into and any bank vault can be cracked.
      He had no right to do what he did. No right whatsoever. Come break into my house to prove how easy it is, don't steal anything, just break into my house and call my cell from my home phone, and I'll prove how happy I am you showed me my security hole by putting two .45 caliber holes in your chest.

      There isn't enough rope in the world to show hackers how much we love them

      For instance I had to put up an anonymous FTP for one day. It is dumb I know, but the user needed to upload something from home, didn't know their home IP off hand and didn't understand log ons and that stuff from the FTP end. SO I did it, I allowed anonymous upload to my FTP, and guess what i got, undeletable folders in my ftp folder, so that some guy could use me as a mirror for files on his warez site.
      your right they showed me the error of my ways, but truth is I knew the error, I just hoped no one would be such a jerk as to have no respect for other peoples property. Hackers are vandals, I can piss in your mailbox, throw shit at your door, there are lots of things I can do, and probably not get caught to prove I can do them, but I don't, because I don't want to screw with other peoples shit. I have respect for other peoples property.

      Hackers probably read their sisters Diaries and say she shouldn't have left it somewhere where I could find it.
      It's oppurtunism at it's worst, and they make me sick.

      --
      Anonymous Cowards - Oh God, How I hate you
    13. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They don't actually state that he ran up any charges on the cards. In fact, if he had, they would have said so.

      In reality, that "$3 million in losses" line is just another bullshit line, the same sort they used to string up Kevin Mitnick.

      The definition of 'damages' is pure, unadulterated bullshit. If someone breaks into my systems and does absolutely nothing but snoop around, I can claim literally thousands in damages. How?

      Simple. First, I claim that since someone was on the computer, all data is compromised. So I have to restore from backups. During the downtime, I claim lost revenues. I get to throw my own time into the definition and make sure that I'm billing about $200/hr.

      There are other ways to keep loading up 'damages' onto the pile. Without 'damages' in 5+ digit numbers, the FBI won't investigate. As a result, you see companies claiming $millions in damages, even if no data is lost, no hardware damaged, nothing.

      If anything, those $3million in damages should be blamed on whoever let the fool in to begin with.

    14. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by Rick+and+Roll · · Score: 1

      Maybe if he stole a million dollars that he didn't plan on giving back.

    15. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > That's like shooting someone just to prove how unsafe firearms are.

      "All analogies are fraud".

    16. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by karnal · · Score: 1

      But then the bank is out of money.

      There's no real good analogy for this.... Well, maybe one. Let's say I break into a web server and steal all of the server-side usernames and passwords. Now, if I don't do anything with them, there's not a lot of harm done... but knowing what those usernames and passwords are could cause havoc in the future... we are all human, you know.

      --
      Karnal
    17. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by bogie · · Score: 1, Insightful

      So you won't mind if I break into your house "just to prove its unsecure"? I won't steal anything, I promise. Can I then sell you my home securing service?

      --
      If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
    18. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by WNight · · Score: 1

      I'm actually glad that fame-seeking hackers are breaking into CC companies and other financial institutions that are supposed to be secure. If it wasn't them, it'd be people breaking in for theft, not fame. If the kiddies hadn't raised awareness we'd be screwed because we'd be more vulnerable and the attacker would be out to exploit everything they found. This way I have a warning of which banks and online stores to avoid. It's as if someone broke into a lock & safe company, into the highest-priced safe, and left a blow-up sheep and a mocking note, then sent pictures of the weaknesses to the newspaper so that everyone would know how weak the security they were being asked to trust really way.

      Much better your business gets egg on its face than I mistakenly trust you and get a crappy product or insecure service.

      btw, get over your AC paranoia - it's simply not convenient to login from every computer I find myself reading Slashdot from.

    19. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by Beatbyte · · Score: 2, Insightful

      if there was damage, the recovery from the damage is the cost that they should have spent securing the system in the first place. i guarantee an accountant showed the cost of a better system and it was turned down for the "OK" version that didn't cost as much.

      you just CANT halfass storing financial data. and if it takes someone breaking into it to make it secure, then so be it.

      just don't act like its comparable to murdering someone to prove a point.

    20. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come break into my house to prove how easy it is, don't steal anything, just break into my house and call my cell from my home phone, and I'll prove how happy I am you showed me my security hole by putting two .45 caliber holes in your chest.

      Hint: shooting someone just because they broke into your house might just be considered an overreaction by some people. If they're threatening you, or if you have reasonably grounds for thinking that deadly force is necessary in self-defense, you can put your .45 caliber holes in their chests.

      But once you start attacking people just because they're in your house without your permission, you're going to end up shooting your daughter's new schoolfriends dead because she was in the bathroom when you got home from work. And I seriously doubt you'll find many juries who look on that sort of thing sympathetically.

    21. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by Ithika · · Score: 1
      No, no and no...

      If you throw all the money into the street you're harming the people who own the money, and the people who work at the institution you've just sprung wide open.

      If you steal a credit card number or two or nine... you have a credit card number. You can use it, or you can not. As it nowhere mentions in the article that they used it, we can safely say they didn't, as that would have been a much more impressive story to write about.

      There's no harm done until money is stolen. It's still a crime, I grant you. But gaining access to credit systems and getting numbers hasn't actually a) physically harmed anyone, b) mentally harmed anyone, or c) deprived anyone of property. So what's the big deal? Throw them out on their ear, patch up the flaws and carry on with life.

      As for getting into their systems "in some nice way that left them unharmed", that's the only way. If you break the system, how do you plan to use it? Or to use your analogy (flawed as it is) how do you intend to steal the money if you nuke the bank first? Stand at the five-mile limit with dark glasses on and wait for the crisped notes to come raining down out of the sky?

    22. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by TGK · · Score: 1


      Not if they have a decent credit card. In fact, federal laws prevent the credit card holder from being liable for more than $50 in fraudulent charges.

      I may be off on that number; it's off the top of my head. I know it's two digits.

      Now the company itself may be out the difference, but given that, it's a lot harder to feel sorry for them, since they are the ones that set the security up in the first place.

      I mean, how much sympathy do you have for the police station that gets robbed?

      --
      Killfile(TGK)
      No trees were killed in the creation of this post. However, many electrons were inconvenienced.
    23. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by actiondan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Okay, so all the hackers that plan to send their results to the company in question or the press stop hacking.

      What are we left with then - just the hackers who are in it for the money. The ones who won't reveal what they have done and so probably won't ever get found out.

      In fact, treating all hackers as malicious criminals, even if they 'do the right thing' after the event, is likely to dissuade them from coming forward with information about how they get into system. The black hats will have a field day.

      Society needs people to test its security without malicious intent. It needs journalists to try to sneak weapons onto planes to expose poor airport security, it needs hackers who don't just siphon off the cash, it needs protesters trying to get into government buildings to hang banners. Without all of these people, the systems would be up against malicious attacks only and many security holes would stay open for long enough for real damage to be done.

    24. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by Niles_Stonne · · Score: 1

      Hackers are vandals, I can piss in your mailbox, throw shit at your door, there are lots of things I can do, and probably not get caught to prove I can do them, but I don't, because I don't want to screw with other peoples shit.

      So throw your own shit!

      (Just a joke, I agree with what you mean)

      --
      Sticks and Stones may break my bones, but copyright will always protect me.
    25. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by brand+bendy · · Score: 0


      Your description of script kiddies sounds a lot like antisocial personality disorder

      --
      I use phrases like "darn good" and "rootin' tootin'", but only when there's a darn good, rootin tootin' reason!
    26. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by MntlChaos · · Score: 1

      it said up to 3 million in losses. I really doubt he charged much on those cards. That's probably the cost of securing it. That's just like saying Mitnick caused hundreds of millions of dollars in damages. That's the cost of developing the code he got. Not the actual loss.

    27. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shut up and die, you stupid moron.

      People like you are just to violent to live in society.

    28. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by Maxwell'sSilverLART · · Score: 1

      Hint: shooting someone just because they broke into your house might just be considered an overreaction by some people. If they're threatening you, or if you have reasonably grounds for thinking that deadly force is necessary in self-defense, you can put your .45 caliber holes in their chests....And I seriously doubt you'll find many juries who look on that sort of thing sympathetically.

      Depends on the state; here in Oklahoma (motto: we're NOT Texas!), we have a law flippantly called the "make my day" law; under that law, anybody entering your house without permission is presumed to be there with the capability and intent to do you harm, and can be shot upon entry. This includes the neighbor-kid-breaking-in-on-a-lark, and that's been tested in court; the shooter was acquitted. The rationale for the law is that it is unreasonable for a man, in his own house, to be forced to take the time to ascertain whether the intruder, who is already breaking in (and thus has the tactical advantage of surprise), is friendly, or hostile. Many states have the same, or similar, laws.

      The situation you give, the daughter's friend, is a little iffier, because she was there before you got home; by a strict reading of the law, it's a righteous shoot, but as a practical matter, it would be both legally and tactically wiser to back out of the house. As a practical matter, unless you carry your gun on your person (security/police officer, concealed carry permit, or other lawful carry), you'd have to go get the thing before you could shoot, and that would be sufficient time to ascertain the threat; further, in that situation, you'd be expected to have some clue of what the other people in your house are doing. If you live alone, though, or it's an intruder at night, you are legally empowered to shoot first and ask questions later, and that is tactically the wisest course of action. Check your state laws for details.

      Bonus point: the etymology of the phrase "breaking an entering" has nothing to do with "breaking," as in damaging, anything. Rather, it comes from the idea of "breaking the threshold," or crossing the line defined by the plane of the doors and windows; it's really just another synonym for entering. As soon as you get one toe through the door, you've "broken" the threshold, and, at least in this state, you're a threat.

      --
      Moderate drunk! It's more fun that way!
    29. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by the_mad_poster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And here we go again. Again with the "It's all the hackers to blame" crap.

      You know what? Chances are good these kids stole a DB full of plaintext card numbers. Why not arrest the idiots that stored them that way and didn't thoroughly test the system as accomplices?

      For you jackasses out there who just scream bloody murder about these stupid kiddies, does it not once occur to you that maybe if you'd have done it right in the first place you wouldn't even have to worry about it? Ashcroft wants to make examples out of these poor kids who were being stupid because YOU dumbasses couldn't take the time to encrypt the credit cards as if it wasn't bad enough that you're storing them in the first place?

      Here's a thought for you mindnumbingly dimwitted morons who think this "lock em up and throw away the key" mentality is worth shit: how many people are stealing these databases and NOT GETTING CAUGHT? Make examples of stupid kids all you want. While they go to jail and you sit there with your smug grin while you watch it on CNN your crappy little system is just as insecure as it was when they broke it the first time. So, who's stealing it NOW and are you going to be able to catch them this time? Or, better yet, are you even going to KNOW? Nobody's system ever got any more secure because they set some dumb kid up for a 20 year stint in the Federal...

      --
      Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
    30. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can you not look beyond the murder part of what he said, and see that he was implying that you have no right to break a law to prove a point like this.

      Soon as you typed that, everybody with more than 1/2 a brain knew to move to the next post. I'd make a rip about the mods but it's too easy, not even worth it. Now excuse me while I smoke this joint & read about Rosa Parks.

    31. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by asdfghjklqwertyuiop · · Score: 1

      For instance I had to put up an anonymous FTP for one day. It is dumb I know, but the user needed to upload something from home, didn't know their home IP off hand and didn't understand log ons and that stuff from the FTP end. SO I did it, I allowed anonymous upload to my FTP, and guess what i got, undeletable folders in my ftp folder, so that some guy could use me as a mirror for files on his warez site.


      Why didn't you set your FTP service up the right way? IE:

      • The anonymous user can write to the incoming directory and only the incoming directory
      • The anonymous user cannot do a directory listing on the incoming directory or change to any directory inside incoming
      • The anonymous user cannot read any files in the incoming directory, no matter what the underlying filesystem permissions are.

    32. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by diablobynight · · Score: 1

      and as usual the anonymous coward has added something rediculous and invaluable. Would this little girl be sneaking into my house at 2 am? if so, so sorry, she's probably going to get shot.

      --
      Anonymous Cowards - Oh God, How I hate you
    33. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by diablobynight · · Score: 1
      Ummm...have you considered the hours of work the IT staff at a few hundred different locations are going to have to do to repair the damage, plus the IT staff can't be sure what the hackers left behind or what they changed, which may cause a rebuild of all systems. This is mental harm. Just as breaking into someones home, even if you don't rob them, can mentally scar them and scare them horribly.

      Whatever you say it's against the law. They shouldnt' have done it. If they didn't like those companies security. Don't shop there.

      There are lots of ways to use a system but leave it broken. I won't name them, because you sound like your one to use them. I bet your a hacker, I hope you end up in federal pound me in the ass prison.

      Or if you feel so strongly about this, hack the FBI to show their security is bad, please please try. Then we'll be rid of you.

      --
      Anonymous Cowards - Oh God, How I hate you
    34. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by Ithika · · Score: 1

      "Just as breaking into someones home, even if you don't rob them, can mentally scar them and scare them horribly."

      Yes, but as we're talking about unsecured systems it's very hard to prosecute someone for that kind of behaviour. If someone walks in an open door or window to your house and takes a good ol' look around then leaves it's very difficult to do anything about it.

      Even if you're there and you got the fright of your life, what have they done? Nothing, fortunately. No theft, no B&E. It happens, and when it does the polis have to lift the kids for breach of the peace. It's a catch-all, in these kinda situations.

      "Whatever you say it's against the law. They shouldnt' have done it."

      Hey, I never said it wasn't. Read my post.

      " ...I hope you end up in federal pound me in the ass prison."

      What, no conjugal visits? You're too cruel.

      "Or if you feel so strongly about this, hack the FBI to show their security is bad, please please try. Then we'll be rid of you."

      Now why would I want to do something like that? So I get sent to the aforementioned prison and forego my conjugal visits? There's no reason; they have very little effect on my and I wouldn't do it even if they did. It shows a distinct lack of respect of others' privacy that kind of behaviour. Maybe if you feel there's just cause you should do it.

    35. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by diablobynight · · Score: 1

      My whole point is that there is never just cause. Breaking and entering doesn't mean you literally broke something to come in. Walking into a home even if the door is unlocked, is B&E.

      --
      Anonymous Cowards - Oh God, How I hate you
    36. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For instance I had to put up an anonymous FTP for one day. It is dumb I know, but the user needed to upload something from home, didn't know their home IP off hand and didn't understand log ons and that stuff from the FTP end. SO I did it, I allowed anonymous upload to my FTP, and guess what i got, undeletable folders in my ftp folder, so that some guy could use me as a mirror for files on his warez site.

      I always have an anonymous ftp account on my FTP server. It is the easiest way to get the latest warez.
      Just be sure you delete the files (which are _always deleteable_) , after you have downloaded them to your desktop machine, to make space for more :)

    37. Re:I love it...script kiddies ultimate defense by Ithika · · Score: 1

      Well if that's the case why does no one get done for breaking and entering if they walked into an unsecured building? The answer is because they *can't* be. Sheesh.

  9. Gates' Credit Card by RobertTaylor · · Score: 2, Funny

    What did they order with it? And did Bill notice 100 being spent out of his 1,000,000,000,000,000.... bank account?

    My Auction:Pan Tilt Ethernet Webcam, UK!

    1. Re:Gates' Credit Card by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually you may find that 1,000,000,000,000,000 turning into 999,999,999,999,900 is quite noticable.
      (Unless Bill has instructed his bank to print his statements in binary.)

    2. Re:Gates' Credit Card by Xenographic · · Score: 3, Funny

      Rumor has it they caught him because of a VERY suspicious charge:

      He ordered several boxed Linux distros ;]

    3. Re:Gates' Credit Card by Grave_Rose · · Score: 1

      SCO licenses?

      Gr@ve_Rose

      --
      !ekoj on si aixelsyD
    4. Re:Gates' Credit Card by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would have made the point come across real nice! Order a truckload of Redhat boxes delivered straight to One Microsoft Way, Redmond WA, billed to Gates' personal credit card.

      Sit back while the press gets wind of it. Priceless!

      There are some things that money can't buy. For everything else...

    5. Re:Gates' Credit Card by jonbryce · · Score: 1

      When I look at http://www.netcraft.com/?restriction=site+ends+wit h&host=.microsoft.com it seems that a fair number of their websites run on linux, so I guess it isn't that suspicious.

  10. Revision to the song by Ed+Avis · · Score: 5, Funny

    Typical - you fund a shiny new building but no sooner is it in use than some bearded hippy moves in and lowers the property values.

    Hoarders may pay to fund new buildings,
    that is true, hackers, that is true.
    But they cannot choose their neighbours.
    That's not good, hackers, that's not good.

    --
    -- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
    1. Re:Revision to the song by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope they put showers in the building.

    2. Re:Revision to the song by jdreed1024 · · Score: 5, Informative
      --
      There is no sig, there is only Zuul.
    3. Re:Revision to the song by Otter · · Score: 1

      Don't feel bad -- that building is the ugliest thing imaginable to begin with. Putting Stallman in there can only increase its esthetic value.

    4. Re:Revision to the song by Farce+Pest · · Score: 1

      I didn't think they had earthquakes in MA. Or was there some sort of collision between parallel universes?

      --
      This message has been scanned for memes and dangerous content by MindScanner, and is believed to be unclean.
    5. Re:Revision to the song by Zachary+Kessin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      IF someone were to ask me to key them into a secured area that they didn't have access to I would say no. There may be reasons that the building has security you know. I don't know all of them but for those of us in the real world things like pass cards are a frequent fact of life. And if it was RMS doubly so.

      --
      Erlang Developer and podcaster
    6. Re:Revision to the song by jbaratz · · Score: 1

      If you think the outside is ugly, you should see the inside. There are exposed, rough finish concrete support beams cutting through the middle rooms (those gray circles on the floor plan), and all the exposed wood on cabinets and shelves is low grade plywood. Other walls are bereft of shelves (Many researchers here keep their own copies of journals), because it was cheaper to leave the studs out of non-structural walls.

      I'm not even getting into the lack of straight lines and right angles (very disorienting). But other than that, and the fact that it's years behind schedule and massively over budget, it's great.

      -JWB

    7. Re:Revision to the song by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      But is he still moving in? You mean when faces with loosing ones job or moving to an area funded by a major software company. He will choose his job. That means he is a puppit of the man. Right.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    8. Re:Revision to the song by j7953 · · Score: 1
      IF someone were to ask me to key them into a secured area that they didn't have access to I would say no.

      Huh? You mean you would invite people, then not let them enter the building you invited them into? Did you notice that RMS said "I have often asked visitors [...]"? I don't know, but this seems to imply that he's talking about visitors that he invited, not simply anyone who happens to knock at the door.

      There may be reasons that the building has security you know.

      Yeah, but if you had read RMS's mesage without an anti-RMS bias, you would have noticed that he claims that the security is not necessary. He says that they're adding it just because they can.

      --
      Sig (appended to the end of comments I post, 54 chars)
    9. Re:Revision to the song by Otter · · Score: 1
      I just took a stroll through the first floor -- I have to confess I thought it was pretty nice, certainly a lot less of an eyesore than the exterior. The concrete beams are poorly placed (especially for a college classroom building), as you say, and the finish doesn't look very good.There's so much construction activity still that it's hard to get a sense of what it will eventually look like.

      I hope you're not allergic to sawdust if they've got you in there now!

    10. Re:Revision to the song by Otter · · Score: 1
      I don't know, but this seems to imply that he's talking about visitors that he invited, not simply anyone who happens to knock at the door.

      No, it's quite clear he's saying to let in anyone that asks. I'm not unsympathetic to his point about excessive security measures, but after years of working across the street from this location, I can absolutely attest that indiscrimnately letting people in the building out of some doctrinaire "hacker" ideal is a poor idea. Not because of secrecy but because they'll steal my CDs or computer peripherals.

    11. Re:Revision to the song by TekPolitik · · Score: 1
      that building is the ugliest thing imaginable to begin with

      Which particular of that conglomerate of architectural monstrosities is it? I haven't seen such hideous structures since the building housing the architecture faculty at the first university I attended.

    12. Re:Revision to the song by frdmfghtr · · Score: 1

      Those of us who refuse to get cards--or refuse to carry them--will
      have to depend on the charity of other lab members to open doors for
      us. So if someone asks you to open a door, please be considerate and
      open it for him. It could be a lab member who resists computerized
      surveillance. It could be a visitor. It could be the friend of your
      friend.


      It could also be somebody looking to make a quick getaway with some expensive lab hardware and sell it. It's called "theft."

      I be willing to bet RMS doesn't leave his front door unlocked at night. Why should MIT?

      --
      Government's idea of a balanced budget: take money from the right pocket to balance...oh who am I kidding?
    13. Re:Revision to the song by nessus42 · · Score: 2, Informative
      but after years of working across the street from this location, I can absolutely attest that indiscrimnately letting people in the building out of some doctrinaire "hacker" ideal is a poor idea. Not because of secrecy but because they'll steal my CDs or computer peripherals.
      I work at MIT half a block from the new building. During the day, my building is unlocked and anyone can enter and walk around in it. The vast majority of MIT is operated this way, and it is a good thing. No one has ever stolen my CD's or my computer periperhals, though I do have to be careful to lock my office door when I leave it, even to go to the bathroom.

      MIT just has a different security model than most businesses. At MIT, the security is usually at the office door, rather than at the front door. I consider this to be a good thing, since it allows students to more easily interact with professors and researchers, and for researchers and professors who work in different buildings to more easily interact with each other.

      The Computer Science labs at MIT, as opposed to the main campus of MIT, for a long time have used the front-door security model because they've been in rented space, rather than on the MIT campus proper. Now that they've moved to the campus, where they belong, I should think that they would want join the main MIT culture in their security model too.

      |>oug
    14. Re:Revision to the song by iabervon · · Score: 1

      It wouldn't be the Gates building if mere occupants had general access to the building and could therefore work unobstructed by administrative policies.

  11. Forget MIT by superpulpsicle · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    These articles hype up MIT (and their facilities) like it's the greatest engineering school. I know more unemployed MIT grads and undergrads than any other school. The world has changed.

    1. Re:Forget MIT by Clowning · · Score: 1

      Thats easy to beat. I'm a Juilliard graduate. The number of my fellow alum who are unemployed...you can imagine.

    2. Re:Forget MIT by ivan256 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Just curious, do you happen to know more MIT grads and undergrads in general?

      When the last company I worked for went out of business I ended up cleaning out the hiring engineering manager's file cabinet. He had three resume folders: Employee referrals, MIT grads, and Other. There's still something to be said for the MIT name.

    3. Re:Forget MIT by MrIrwin · · Score: 1
      Unemployed undergrads?

      Presumably MIT students don't have to work thier way througth college like everybody else. Perhaps they should be included in the Ivy league?

      --

      And if you thought that was boring you obviously havn't read my Journal ;-)

    4. Re:Forget MIT by ThogScully · · Score: 1

      Perhaps you're a WPI grad like me? Personally, I'll admit that it sucks to see MIT get all of the attention for tech schools in the northeast and a certain amount of jealousy will always reside in me.

      But then again, to ignore the fact that MIT is also obviously a really good school is just silly and petty.
      -N

      --
      I've nothing to say here...
    5. Re:Forget MIT by ivan256 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      WPI was well on it's way to having a good rep before they started pushing their certificate programs. Now I feel the weight of my student loans crushing me even more every time I see one of their commercials and know that the value of my degree is slowly dropping...

    6. Re:Forget MIT by avgjoe62 · · Score: 1
      When the last company I worked for went out of business ...

      That part there might be a clue...

      --

      How come Slashdot never gets Slashdotted?

    7. Re:Forget MIT by Eagle5596 · · Score: 1

      Perhaps you're a WPI grad like me? Personally, I'll admit that it sucks to see MIT get all of the attention for tech schools in the northeast and a certain amount of jealousy will always reside in me.

      But then again, to ignore the fact that MIT is also obviously a really good school is just silly and petty.


      Well one could always look to the rankings to see why MIT gets pushed above WPI.

      From www.cra.org, MIT scores a 4.91/5.00, and WPI a 1.13/5.00

      From the looks of it, WPI has a pretty crappy program.

    8. Re:Forget MIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I'm supposed to trust those "statistics" why?

      Just like with people, you cannot just shove a test in their face and guage them based on the results. There are factors that cannot be easily determined.

    9. Re:Forget MIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what?

      Down here in Texas, you can find plenty of employers that give preference to Texas A&M grads or UT grads but not MIT grads.

    10. Re:Forget MIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Ivy League is simply a sports conference.

      It really doesn't have anything to do money, reputation etc. There are plently of very well regarded schools that are not in the Ivy League. Many schools are "better" than schools that are in the league.

    11. Re:Forget MIT by amabbi · · Score: 1
      Just like with people, you cannot just shove a test in their face and guage them based on the results. There are factors that cannot be easily determined.

      OK, don't trust the reputation of MIT. Here are the results. 57 MIT-affiliated Nobel Prize winners, including the co-inventor of the transistor (Shockley), one of the world's best organic chemists (Woodward), inventor of one of the most important chemistry experiments (Mulliken oil drop experiment). One of the architects of the free software movement (RMS) and the inventor of the WWW (TBL) are MIT affiliates. Several potential soon-to-be Nobel laureates (Langer, Guth, maybe even Chomsky given the political attitudes of Stockholm these days) in a variety of science, engineering, and social science fields. Back in 1997, BankBoston released a study that calculated that if all of the MIT-related businesses were put into a separate economy, it would be the 11th largest economy in the world.

      Is the MIT name overhyped? Perhaps, but the results speak for themselves.

    12. Re:Forget MIT by Eagle5596 · · Score: 1

      And I'm supposed to trust those "statistics" why?

      Just like with people, you cannot just shove a test in their face and guage them based on the results. There are factors that cannot be easily determined.


      The classic response of someone who "couldn't hack it". WPI is not a good institution, and as someone else has pointed out, there are good solid ways to point it out.

      First off, publications, how often do the faculty publish work that gets accepted by a real journal? This is a good measure of how well the faculty can do their job, and affect their field.

      At MIT, 77% of the CS faculty publish on a regular basis, averaging 3.8 publications per faculty member. In addition they have a Gini coefficient of 6.0, meaning that these works are only 6% concentrated, in otherwords, almost all of the faculty publish at or near the average.

      At WPI, 58% of the CS faculty publish on a regular basis, averaging 1.1 publications per faculty member. Not only do most faculty not publish, and few articles are published from WPI at all, but their Gini coefficient is 18.3%, meaning that these publications are concentrated over twice as much than as MIT. Furthermore, these "star publishers" at WPI who make up the bulk of WPI's publications are publishing less frequently than the low people on the totem pole at MIT.

      Face the facts mate, WPI is not a good institution.

    13. Re:Forget MIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Publishing articles do NOT put food on your table. People like to go to Harvard because the connections can semi-guarantee you a good living.

      You can't find a lamer statistics to defend MIT.

    14. Re:Forget MIT by ivan256 · · Score: 1

      It didn't go out of business because of the hiring practices, but because of the financial decisions.

    15. Re:Forget MIT by Eagle5596 · · Score: 1

      Publications help to define how well known the faculty is, and how active they are in their research. Degrees from MIT connect you in a way that few other places are. Unless your CS degree is from a top 10, or at the least a top 20 school, you'll never compete with those candidates. Does it matter if you go to MIT or Wisconsin? Not in the long run, but WPI isn't going to get you as far.

      Top 10 Computer Science Programs:
      Stanford, MIT, Berkeley, Carnegie Mellon, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign, Cornell, Princeton, University of Texas at Austin, University of Washington, University of Wisconsin at Madison.

      Top 20 Computer Science Programs:
      Harvard, CalTech, Brown, UCLA, Yale, Maryland - College Park, NYU, Massachusetts at Amherst, Rice, University of Southern California, University of Michigan.

      People know these programs are the best because of the work they produce, the research labs that they run, and the training they give to their students. These places give you jobs. Publications are a GREAT way to see how well the faculty are doing because publishing means your advisor will be well known and well connected, and that he can pass on those connections to you.

    16. Re:Forget MIT by avgjoe62 · · Score: 1
      It didn't go out of business because of the hiring practices, but because of the financial decisions.

      Ah, but were the MIT Grads the ones making the financial decisions? :-)

      --

      How come Slashdot never gets Slashdotted?

  12. Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh, the ironic...ness...icity!

    Fine, I don't know what to say, it's just that this is kind of a strange and funny situation, and there's not much to comment on. I mean "RMS, in Bill Gates Building!" and then we all laugh, and it goes somewhat like "gauffle, gauffle, gauffle!"

    Slashdot mods, please forgive me.

  13. Support RMS, buy Microsoft products! by valentyn · · Score: 2, Funny

    No way... so by buying Microsoftware, we supported the FSF?

    --
    my other sig is a 500 page novel
    1. Re:Support RMS, buy Microsoft products! by Eagle5596 · · Score: 1

      No it's just prophetic for Free Software moving into areas once thought to be the territory of Microsoft. Such as PC's.

    2. Re:Support RMS, buy Microsoft products! by chadjg · · Score: 2, Funny

      I've never had the fortune of meeting Mr. Stallman, but I'm asuming he has some sense of humor. I'm a still very new to the GNU/Linux scene, but I can appreciate the guy's work.

      I say we find out what his official title is and print him up some business cards with the building name in extra bold print. It'll either give him a chuckle every time he hands one out or make his head explode.

      This is an all around good deal I think. Mr. Gates gets to do good as he sees it and get some PR and RMS gets a nice place to do his work in. One of them will eventually eat the other's lunch anyway.

      --
      Why do I have this? I don't smoke.
  14. Facinating about the credit card bit by downix · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think the term about those kids that felt that they were doing the "right thing" that is most apt is "shoot the messenger." Some young kids uncover security holes that could lead into millions of fraud if not patched, and then tell the authorities, let's arrest the kids. Makes it less likely that some good samaritin will do the same in the future, leaving security holes open for those less ethical to actually steal the money!

    What's next, arresting the kid that stuck his finger into the dike?

    --
    Karma Whoring for Fun and Profit.
    1. Re:Facinating about the credit card bit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I believe they're either called "homosexual females" or "lesbians" now.

    2. Re:Facinating about the credit card bit by Maestro4k · · Score: 5, Insightful
      • I think the term about those kids that felt that they were doing the "right thing" that is most apt is "shoot the messenger." Some young kids uncover security holes that could lead into millions of fraud if not patched, and then tell the authorities, let's arrest the kids. Makes it less likely that some good samaritin will do the same in the future, leaving security holes open for those less ethical to actually steal the money!
      This is a bit different than just finding security holes and reporting them. They actually gained access to the credit card numbers and (persumably) account information for many accounts. They didn't just find and report the holes, they exploited them, THEN reported them. This would be akin to you noticing your neighbor left the keys in his car and you decided to take it for a ride before telling him about it.
    3. Re:Facinating about the credit card bit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >What's next, arresting the kid that stuck his finger into the dike?

      Good God!
      Rob Lowe, That guy from "Pianist", RJ Kelly, Michael Jackson, and now some frigin lesbian gets in on it.

      When will this END!

    4. Re:Facinating about the credit card bit by Mateito · · Score: 1

      > What's next, arresting the kid that stuck his
      > finger into the dike?

      And in typical Slashdot fashion, it all comes back to porn :)

    5. Re:Facinating about the credit card bit by Vexware · · Score: 1

      Though it may be true that those teenagers discovered security holes that could have cost several hundred thousands of dollars of losees both personal (every client in the sites' databases is a potential victim of fraud) and professional (with the said sites having to deal with the consequences which follow, such as compensation, a massive advertising campaign to catch up on the bad reputation, and whatnot), you shouldn't omit that by spending $3 million on Bill Gates' credit card, the boys did commit a crime, fact which is not altered by their discoveries of the security holes in the e-commerce systems.

      What's more, I suppose that the sites hacked by the teenagers would rather want to sue the boys than compensate them, as I beleive the said sites must have a user charter which strictly prohibits the act of abusing of the service or of its eventual security faults, whether it is to commit another crime or not -- another crime which in this case is theft, as the money they used to pay for the items wasn't theirs. The two teenagers can always say they were doing the 'right thing', which they and others perhaps think they were, but the truth is they just commited a crime, or two.

      To avoid having insult added to their injury, once the boys had discovered the faults in the sites' security systems, they should have contacted the site administrators to alert them on the subject and tell them how to repair the security holes (as far as the "hacker ethic" goes anyway); but instead, they exploited their knowledge to commit a real crime by stealing $3 million from the planet's richest man, Bill Gates (though I do wonder if he actually noticed the "slight" outcome on his account; he must have thought his wife had bought another wrist watch). I don't think you can argue that it really is the boys' fault if they now find themselves in this situation, and I wouldn't be surprised if they had to pay a hefty fine alongside a lengthy ban from the vicinity of any computers.

      --
      "Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a completely unintentional side effect" -- Linus Torval
    6. Re:Facinating about the credit card bit by entrigant · · Score: 4, Funny

      This would be akin to you noticing your neighbor left the keys in his car and you decided to take it for a ride before telling him about it.

      Oh shit! That's illegal?!

    7. Re:Facinating about the credit card bit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      arresting the kid that stuck his finger into the dike?

      Did she consent to it?

    8. Re:Facinating about the credit card bit by schon · · Score: 1

      They didn't just find and report the holes, they exploited them, THEN reported them.

      Not according to the article.

      Seems that they found and reported the holes, but nobody listened, so they then exploited the holes, and presented proof.

      This would be akin to you noticing your neighbor left the keys in his car and you decided to take it for a ride before telling him about it.

      No, this would be like noticing your neighbour left his keys in his car, telling him about it, him not believing you, so you go get the keys and give them to him.

    9. Re:Facinating about the credit card bit by Copperhead · · Score: 1
      How did they exploit them? I didn't see anything about him using the cards to purchase anything, but maybe I missed something.

      --
      Your reality is lies and balderdash and I'm delighted to say that I have no grasp of it whatsoever. - Baron Munchausen
    10. Re:Facinating about the credit card bit by Danse · · Score: 1

      This would be akin to you noticing your neighbor left the keys in his car and you decided to take it for a ride before telling him about it.

      Not even close really. It's more like you telling him that his car door locks aren't working properly and can be easily opened with 2 paperclips and some chewing gum, and him not believing you. So you open the door to his car and then show him that you were able to do it. Then he calls the cops and has you tossed in jail for breaking in to his car. Note that they didn't actually steal anything, so the comparison to joyriding in the guy's car is not accurate. If we wanted to get even more accurate with this, let's say that it was a car dealer instead of your neighbor. Then say that it's an entire model-year that displays the problem.

      --
      It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
    11. Re:Facinating about the credit card bit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Man, it irks me when people try to use real life analogies in these kind of situations. It's not like finding your neighbors keys in the car.. you *know* turning the keys in the ignition should start the car, you probably don't *know* that your exploit (persumably SQL-Injection) has access to view credit card info for sure without trying.. or atleast doing a count or something which is, in a way, still accessing the content (even with a count of the records you don't know if the CCNum field for instance has the full number now do you?) Simply telling dip-sh*t web devs that there page has a SQL injection problem can get shrugged off, but most people recognize a problem as explicit as "Hey, here's your customers credit card numbers, this is how I got them, fix it".. course all of that is totally different than using stolen credit cards or sending that private information to third-parties (e.g. NBCi)

    12. Re:Facinating about the credit card bit by cavebear42 · · Score: 1

      Where does it say that they put on the Armani's and drove their new Lamborghinis in to tell them about the problem? It sounds to me like they presented the data as soon as they had proof of insecurity.

    13. Re:Facinating about the credit card bit by ImpTech · · Score: 1

      I'm not much of a hacker admittedly, but how can you be sure you've found a security problem if you don't exploit it?

    14. Re:Facinating about the credit card bit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More like arresting the kid who broke the dike open with a pickax to prove that it could be done.

  15. Their mothers' names... by Patik · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...make me think "Maximus Dorkus", which makes me think of Pilate's fwiends' names in "Life of Brian".

    1. Re:Their mothers' names... by Tin+Foil+Hat · · Score: 1

      Hehe. So who's Biggus Dickus?

      --
      No matter how many of my rights are taken away, somehow I still don't feel safe. -Frigid Monkey
    2. Re:Their mothers' names... by _UnderTow_ · · Score: 1

      I think that you may be thinking of 'Naughtius Maxiumus', the guy with the severe lisp.

    3. Re:Their mothers' names... by The+Angry+Mick · · Score: 1

      Or, the line in Mel Brook's History of the World, Part One:

      "The rest of you, run with Mucus!"
      --

      I'm not tense. I'm just terribly, terribly, alert.

    4. Re:Their mothers' names... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It should be Life of Bwian!!!

    5. Re:Their mothers' names... by kubrick · · Score: 1

      Biggus Dickus has the lisp; Pilate pronounces his Rs as Ws ("Welease Wodewick!"); Naughtius Maximus is (supposedly) the name of Brian's father.

      --
      deus does not exist but if he does
  16. Harvard solidiarity? by 0x0d0a · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Harvard, in a laudable attempt to retain solidarity with the Open Source community, dedicated the Maxwell Dworkin building (named after Gates' and Ballmer's mothers respectively)

    I'm sure I'm just missing something here, but how does naming a building after the mothers of the cofounders of Microsoft build solidiarity with the OSS community in the least?

    1. Re:Harvard solidiarity? by El_Ge_Ex · · Score: 1

      your mother...

      (sorry, gut reaction.)

      -B

    2. Re:Harvard solidiarity? by cozziewozzie · · Score: 1

      They probably thought that RMS would be tempted to switch over to Harvard, now that they also have a Microsoft-inspired building.

      If nothing else, it could lure Eben Moglen from Columbia; as far as I know, there are no Bill Gates buildings over there, and he will surely be tempted!

    3. Re:Harvard solidiarity? by dAzED1 · · Score: 1

      I read the post and thought exactly the same thing. I mean...yeah. What makes that "attempt" so "laudable," if that was what was being attempted?

    4. Re:Harvard solidiarity? by forand · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think it might have been a very bad attempt at sarcasm.

    5. Re:Harvard solidiarity? by saforrest · · Score: 1

      I'm sure I'm just missing something here, but how does naming a building after the mothers of the cofounders of Microsoft build solidiarity with the OSS community in the least?

      My best guess is that the poster thought the OSS community would be more pleased with a building named after Gates' and Ballmer's mothers than a building named after Gates and Ballmer themselves.

      Calling this 'retaining solidarity' is ridiculous, though. Since when did the OSS community have Harvard's solidarity to begin with?

    6. Re:Harvard solidiarity? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      This is an example of irony used for humorous effect.

      Another example is the fact that Slashdot readers rated your question as "Score: 5, Insightful".

  17. Cambridge University, UK by mattbee · · Score: 1

    The computer labs at my old uni now have a shiny new William Gates Building which the Compscis moved into the year I left. The old building was too tall, weird and creaky but at least there were some good pubs nearby :-)

    --
    Matthew @ Bytemark Hosting
    1. Re:Cambridge University, UK by cozziewozzie · · Score: 1

      Gates has been cooperating with Cambridge for quite a while. There is a Bill and Melinda Gates scholarship for computer science that's been running for a really long time.

    2. Re:Cambridge University, UK by pjt33 · · Score: 1

      Three years is a long time?

    3. Re:Cambridge University, UK by Mysticalfruit · · Score: 1

      For windows it is! Three years on a windows box! Damn, you must have had it disconnected from the network and in hibernation mode...

      --
      Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
    4. Re:Cambridge University, UK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure that Gate's scholarships are for any subject, not just CompSci - it's part of their charity work, as opposed to MS. Of course, MS Research also have links with the University, but that's something separate.

    5. Re:Cambridge University, UK by cozziewozzie · · Score: 1

      I think I saw it in the prospectus 5-6 years ago. I could be wrong, though.

    6. Re:Cambridge University, UK by pjt33 · · Score: 1

      "As the Gates Cambridge Scholarship program enters its third year"... - written this year, because it refers to Cambridge's "new Vice Chancellor, Professor Alison Richard".

  18. It is right and fitting...... by MrIrwin · · Score: 2, Funny

    That the Bill Gates building is the home of "Artificial" intelligence. Perhaps now we will see The Borg incorporated in Emacs.

    --

    And if you thought that was boring you obviously havn't read my Journal ;-)

    1. Re:It is right and fitting...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh I'm sure they're already in there somewhere. It's just that there's so much in Emacs to assimilate it's going to take them a long time to eventually take over the whole thing. The Delta quadrant? That's nothing compared to the size of Emacs.

    2. Re:It is right and fitting...... by qtp · · Score: 1

      the Bill Gates building is the home of "Artificial" intelligence.

      Only because they thought that iot would be inappropriate to make it the home of "Genuine" intelligence.

      --
      Read, L
  19. Bill Gates: An American Hero by USAPatriot · · Score: 0, Interesting
    Here's a guy who started a company from scratch, and worked his way up to being the richest man in the world.

    And to top if off, he's now the most generous philanthropist too. His foundation, focused on fighting disease and promoting education will leave a bigger and longer lasting legacy than his business accomplishments.

    Having some buildings names after him is a small token of apprecation in comparison to his generosity.

    --

    Slashdot Moderation: From positive to terrible in 2 "insightful" posts.

    1. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by Minna+Kirai · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Here's a guy who started a company from scratch,

      From birth, William Gates III was a millionaire. (Trust fund from wealthy parents). The lowest net-worth he's ever experienced is greater than the highest an average American can ever expect.

    2. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by Maestro4k · · Score: 3, Informative
      • And to top if off, he's now the most generous philanthropist too. His foundation, focused on fighting disease and promoting education will leave a bigger and longer lasting legacy than his business accomplishments.
      I hesitate to call Gates a true philanthropist, as I remember how he was highly criticized by others for not doing much. Finally he started doing more philanthropy, but it took a lot of public humiliation to get him to. Perhaps I'm wrong, but the way it all came about it looks like Gates is just giving away money to save face, not because he truly believes in or cares about any of the causes he gives to.
    3. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd rather be Mother Theresa (including the dead bit) than Bill Gates.

      Personally, I reckon philanthropy can be a zero sum game. The philanthropy is simply undoing some of the damage done by the process of accumulating the fortune. Money doesn't make you a good bloke.

    4. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by the_womble · · Score: 4, Insightful
      he's now the most generous philanthropist too

      How generous: give some money away AFTER you have ruthlessly and greedily made more than you could possibly actually use yourself.

      I prefer Jesus' view of what constitutes generosity to yours.

    5. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by Mr.+Darl+McBride · · Score: 1
      I hesitate to call Gates a true philanthropist, as I remember how he was highly criticized by others for not doing much. Finally he started doing more philanthropy, but it took a lot of public humiliation to get him to. Perhaps I'm wrong, but the way it all came about it looks like Gates is just giving away money to save face, not because he truly believes in or cares about any of the causes he gives to.
      If a man is serving charities in a meaningful way, it's absolute rubbish to question his motives. You can accomplish no good by doing this, so drop it -- please.
    6. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by cozziewozzie · · Score: 1

      His charity work should be commended, but I would respect it even more if much of it weren't in intangibles like MS Windows licenses.

    7. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, I'm in awe. When a post with this title and content gets modded UP on slashdot, it's time to leave slashdot.

      A hero my ass.

    8. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Still any one of us would like to receive a 40,000x return on investment, right? We'd just like to do it with ethics.

    9. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by squarooticus · · Score: 2, Informative

      Give me a break. As much as I can't stand Microsoft's business tactics, Bill Gates has given several hundred thousand dollars per day to charity, amortized over his entire lifetime. What have you done?

      --
      [ home ]
    10. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by USAPatriot · · Score: 1
      From birth, William Gates III was a millionaire. (Trust fund from wealthy parents).

      And that diniminishes my point, how?

      The fact is that before Bill Gates, there was no Microsoft, no employees, no product, no sales.

      There were plenty of other people richer than him 20+ years ago, but they didn't or couldn't do what he did.

      Whatever personal wealth he used to build his company (I doubt it was much), doesn't take away what an incredibly successful accomplishment it is.

      --

      Slashdot Moderation: From positive to terrible in 2 "insightful" posts.

    11. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Look, I would suggest you get off your high horse and take a look at the reality. A lot of rich people contribute money to charity because it is easier to claim tax credits for it. Why the heck do you think there are so many foundations around? Many are there for a purpose but others are just for the IRS. As for Bill Gates, if he didn't contribute money for the causes he has, would you contribute the same amount and fill in his shoes? Probably not. So true or false philanthropy, he is contributing and making a difference. His contributions to charity is set to increase over the coming years.
      As for that saving face, not true. If he wanted, instead of 50-60 million at a time, he could have given 2-3 million. People like you would still say he's trying to save face.

    12. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by ArghBlarg · · Score: 1

      Ah, a fine troll if I ever saw one. I'll bite. It's Monday and I don't feel like working quite yet :-)

      Bill Gates does have incredible business acumen but he shouldn't be looked up to as you imply. The best way to become rich is to have parents who already are -- see

      http://philip.greenspun.com/bg/

      And while what to him is pocket change does benefit those who receive it, don't make any mistake -- it's pocket change to him. If he were really such a Mother Theresa wannabe, why doesn't he contribute HALF of his net worth to some great cause? It's the thought that counts, right? If he did that, I'd be more inclined see him as a 'great philanthropist' -- that actually implies a great sacrifice.

      --
      ERROR 144 - REBOOT ?
    13. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by DAldredge · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      So, what is your opinion of the offshoring of US jobs?

    14. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by IWantMoreSpamPlease · · Score: 1

      Gotten people off welfare and got them a job where they can support themself.

      Your point again?

      --
      So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
    15. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by dAzED1 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Troll :P Constant Bill-bashing is silly in its own right, but wanting to suck him off is far worse.

      First, he never started from scratch. He was born very rich, then got even luckier.

      Second, he donates less of a percentage of his disposable income than I do by FAR. In fact, I'd suggest that the average American donates a considerably higher percentage of their disposable income than he does. $20Mill is nothing to him - it would be like me handing out $40 over the course of a year to things (homeless, the church, Girl Scouts, whatever). $20Mill is 1/2000 of his worth. The average American is lucky to have a net worth in the 5 figures...most live paycheck to paycheck with 4 figure accounts (which means they only need to donate $10 a year to blow Bill to bits, percentage-wise), and make mortgage payments until they die.

      There's also the tax benefits to the "foundation," which he sits on for further benefits (why just donate money, when you can start a foundation? and name it after yourself? and sit on the board?).

      When most Americans would be fiscally devastated by a $1,000 unexpected expense, Bill could have a $100,000,000 unexpected expense and not change his lifestyle AT ALL.

      The foundation, the scholarships, and everything else is all just PR for him, to make people dislike him less. And it works, obviously.

      Third point: if he was truely being generous, his name wouldn't be on any buildings.

      Fourth point: the "legacy" of his foundation will last only as long as his money is in it. Its done nothing all that substantial. His business finess though has made a very substantial impact on the planet, and will be remembered for a very long time.

    16. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      his mom's connetions helped out to.

      "from scratch" is a bit of a stretch.

    17. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by Analogy+Man · · Score: 1
      I must admit I have to tip my hat to Gates on this issue. His business practices are a reflection on an insanely competetive streak to win at all costs and by all measures.

      I note that his increased involvement with charities correlate more with married life adn fatherhood than anything people said in criticism.

      The same drive to win is refected in his interactions with his foundation's work. He demands success (which is not a bad thing). Even if the motivations are that of a meglomaniac, cures for cancer, malaria, ... are hard to be against.

      --
      When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.
    18. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so you are saying he's damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. With that sort of attitude if I ever become filthy rich I'ld keep my money in offshore bank accounts. You can't please everyone all the time, so might as well please yourself.

      Too bad I'll never get to the point where I have to worry about that...

    19. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by Hektor_Troy · · Score: 1

      Well, I usually give about 5% of my income to charity (and no - that isn't tax-deductible here).

      Bill Gates probably gives more than that - but on the other hand, if you have 40 billion dollars to your name, you could give away 99% and still be rich for life.

      Anyway - my point is that the amount of money you give away doesn't really tell you. Some people give to charity in order to get tax breaks. Some do it to be popular. Others do it because it makes them feel good. Others just because they can't think of better things to do with their money.

      --
      We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
    20. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      > And that diniminishes my point, how?

      'cause you said he started it all from scratch, when in fact, he did not.

      And for good measure..... A group of my fellow cowaorkers once investigated billy's philanthropy. Taking his generous offerings against his net worth. To match his generousity, each of us could give less than 1 USD and still be putting up a greater hardship. Bah!

    21. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by ivan256 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And that diniminishes my point, how?

      Ever hear the saying "The first million is the hardest?"

      I'm about the same age now as Bill Gates was when he started Microsoft. I wish I could be out starting a company instead of working to dig myself out of the debt that was created when I obtained an education. If I had a million dollars now, I bet I could turn it into 10 million in 8-9 years. Instead, I'll be lucky to have a half-million saved up by then, and if I do it will be as equity in a house, not as liquid assets.

      I'm not trying to diminish his acomplishments, but you can't really hold him up as an icon for what anybody can achieve.

    22. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by pclminion · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Perhaps I'm wrong, but the way it all came about it looks like Gates is just giving away money to save face, not because he truly believes in or cares about any of the causes he gives to.

      I'm pretty sure the people who have benefitted from his contributions don't care whether he cares. There's an alternate way of looking at this: Bill Gates donates to causes that he doesn't even care about. It sounds almost more philanthropic, put that way.

      Personally, I'd prefer the big donors to be as minimally invested in any one ideology as possible. I don't want them to deeply care about causes. They should be concerned with helping people, in general.

      I'm no fan of Microsoft, but Bill Gates' money has done more great things than I'll ever be able to accomplish.

    23. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Unless you have evidence he put significant sums of his own personal wealth into Microsoft, then yes, he did start it from scratch.

      BTW, any sane businessman would never risk his own fortune like that. People get rich by risking other peoples' money, not their own.

    24. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by diablobynight · · Score: 1

      What the fuck does it matter what his reasoning behind giving the money is. He still has. Nearly 33% percent of his net worth. Which isn't exactly a tax break.
      Also, so what if he could give away 99% and still be rich, ever consider he holds onto money incase his company ever flags and he wants to save it.
      Or maybe he might personally want to invest in another company some day. Get of your high horse. Maybe if you were as smart as Bill Gates you could make more money to give to charity.

      --
      Anonymous Cowards - Oh God, How I hate you
    25. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by diablobynight · · Score: 2, Insightful

      He has contributed over 20 billion dollars. He stated the reason he doesn't just give it all to some great charity because there are no great charities. Look it up. Salvation army, and all the big charities blow over 50% of every dollar on overhead administration. So he is careful about how he gives away his money. And I wouldn't call 20 Billion, pocket change, even to Bill Gates.

      Starting out rich isn't a free pass to doing well in business. Lets look, Paris Hilton, more wealthy than Billy boy, Certainly hasn't done her business any good.

      George Bush, our president, couldn't hack it in business, hence the faltering of his oil company and every business he touches.

      All the children of the wallmart fortune. Most of them are worthless, business is ruthless and to have done as well as Gates has, you have to be extremely intelligent. And I garantee you he is. Have a conversation with him someday. He's a very intelligent guy, despite what slashdot would have you believe.

      --
      Anonymous Cowards - Oh God, How I hate you
    26. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I believe Paul Allen and many others, like the wife of McDonald's founder are far more generous. Gates is a businessman first, so he does it for a huge tax break.

      I'm just guessing, but it could be Bill's Wife doing all this gift giving. When Mr and Mrs Gates started to donate, it was because of Mrs. Gates. So the world should thank her for changing an otherwise greedy self-centered man. To a less greedy, less self-centered man.

    27. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by diablobynight · · Score: 1

      By your statement, Carnegie wasn't generous, the kennedy family is not generous, Mother Teresa is not generous.

      Did you ever consider that some people are generous, but that it's also nice to be remembered. Also look closer, he has donated over 20 Billion dollars to charity throughout his life. Not 20 million.

      --
      Anonymous Cowards - Oh God, How I hate you
    28. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by Hektor_Troy · · Score: 1
      Well, my gripe wasn't with Bill Gates. My gripe was with
      "Bill Gates has given several hundred thousand dollars per day to charity, amortized over his entire lifetime. What have you done?"
      As if the fact that he has tons more money makes his sacrifice that much more worthy than anyone elses.

      Yes, obviously the amount of money Bill Gates gives to charity make a way bigger difference than what little I give (seing as I make less than $10.000 a year). The original parents sentiment seems to me to be "if you can't give more money to charity than the richest man in the world, shut the fuck up and die!1!, which I have a problem with.

      I believe it is one of Jebus' fables that an exidingly rich man donates 10% of his wealth to the church and expects better treatment than the pauper of a woman, who also donates 10% of her "riches".

      Also - I didn't say that he gives away money to get a tax break. I listed a bunch of possible reasons why people might give to charity - you just picked one of them and pounced on it.
      --
      We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
    29. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by iamacat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The fact is that before Bill Gates, there was no Microsoft, no employees, no product, no sales.

      Well I give you one out of four here. There was, in fact no Microsoft, but people were employed, made products and sold them all the same. Monopoly is definitely reducing the total number of software jobs and products.

      what an incredibly successful accomplishment it is

      If you mean his personal accomplishment to make money for himself, then definitely. If you mean the contribution to society - well there is a good but crazily expensive word processor and a decent C++ development IDE. This doesn't make up for all the areas where they destroyed or diminished other companies - Apple *, Netscape, Real, Corel, Lotus - and stopped making improvements to their own product once they had all or most of the market.

      Are you seriously implying that giving people a work environment where opening an e-mail message without any attachments wipes out your HD is an accomplishment?

      * Yes, this one actually needed a wake up call from MS to make a better product. But now they do have one, and would be enourmously popular if not for MS monopoly. And cheaper too - high volume == low cost.

    30. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by JaxWeb · · Score: 1

      But there would had been a Netscape!

      --
      - Jax
    31. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Al Capone built a huge business from scratch, too. Most of it was even legit.

      And he probably spread more of his wealth around that Mr. Gates does.

      Let's hear it for Al Capone, another great American hero! (And still voting in Cook County)

    32. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by dAzED1 · · Score: 1
      no, there are over 20billion in *endowments* granted during his lifetime. You should look closer and notice that almost all those endowments have long-term payouts. Remember Ted Turner's $10bill promise to the UN that never happened? Saying you'll pay $7mill over the course of the next 10 years doesn't mean you've donated $7mill *this* year, it means you've donated $700k. This as an example.

      I was also speaking on terms of yearly donations. I'd like to see what his donations were last year. Then, compare that number. Not some promised-in-the-future number...a number that he has actually donated in a year. Compare that number to his net worth. Take that percentage. Do you think that the practice of giving away goods and services is limited just to lawsuits he loses? Trace the money. Look at what actually goes out. If the average American donates $10 in a year, they beat him. Note that since I do about 20% of my disposable income, and my net worth is currently a negative number (try putting a wife through vet school without such), Bill isn't doing anything. Its all relative. I suffer actual consequences for donating - each $40 given somewhere is one less time we can eat out. Again - if he gives away $40Mill, it doesn't change his lifestyle *at all*. He can give away literally a million times as much as me without having to do anything differently, adjust his budget, etc.

      Another thing - Mother Theresa donated her life to charity. She didn't live in billion dollar houses, with every imaginable luxury.

      Bill is *going* to be remembered. No "charitible" thing he does will really impact that, unless he gives an actual substantial portion of his actual money. He'll definately be remembered though. Do you *really* think he wouldn't have been, without the facade?

    33. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which is the problem. Not the ethics part, but the other thing. No one can expect to see that kind of money (or percent return) unless they're seriously screwing pretty much everyone else. That sort of lottery mentality just isn't compatible with an ethical outlook.

      No one can reasonably expect to be (or deserves to be) that rich in any sort of sustainable economy. Microsoft's and Gates's wealth is enormously bad for the software industry and every other industry. Just as JK Rowling's billionaire status is money taken away from every other author in the world (not to mention the parents who pay gouging prices for books). It doesn't matter how hard they try to be philanthropical afterward - the money would have been better used by the people who originally earned it, distributed through their own local economies.

      Frankly if we want a model where we enormously concentrate wealth and then use it for big grandiose projects, well, that's what governments are for. Everyone seems to hate them, yet admire billionaires. I don't get it.

    34. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by dAzED1 · · Score: 1

      oh, btw - the $20Mill figure was in reference to what he paid for that building. Way to read the articles!

    35. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by diablobynight · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      I read it, I was just stating that that was just one of many donations.

      I am saying that you being poor isn't an excuse. that's exactly what I am saying.

      That if you worked harder, dedicated yourself to it, you could be worth millions and then be able to donate much much more. A dollar is worth a dollar, whether it is donated by a rich man or a poor man.

      so if he give 40 million and you give 40, his donation is worth a million times as much to the cause he is donating to. Maybe if you had worked harder, you could donate more without affecting your pocket book.

      So go work harder. And stop whining that he has a billion dollar house. He earned it.

      --
      Anonymous Cowards - Oh God, How I hate you
    36. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by dAzED1 · · Score: 1
      heh...harder? I've put in my fair number of 60+ hour weeks. Poor? Not in the sense that I could easily stroll back to LA or such and get $110k+ again...that's just not an option near where I am right now (geographically controlled by the location of my wife's school, which likewise is quite expensive). Whining? Hardly - I'm just not a Bill fanboy, wanting to suck him off.

      What part of "he was born rich" confuses you? What part of "he was lucky" goes over your head? Do you not know the history of his company? The whole deal with IBM that occured? Luck. Not hard work (though there was plenty of that), just a matter of being at the right place at the right time.

      I'm quantifying his generosity not his donations. Yes, he donates a larger volume. But that doesn't make him a highly generous person. Never did I question whether my $40 could feed as many people as his $40 million. Try reading. All I'm discussing is his generosity.

      If YOU had an unexpected expense of $100,000,000, would it leave you unphased?

      American dream aside, there's a limit to how often the "work harder" thing will work. In almost all cases of the really rich, it's more like "work harder AND be at the right place at the right time." Unfortunately, no matter how many are working harder, there's a limit to those "right places" ;) its completely niave to think our economic system works in any other way. And of the billionaire club...that's being at *exactly* the right place at *exactly* the right time. There's no questioning that. No one on that list did it purely by hard work, or even due to intelligence.

      So lets go back to Mother Theresa...she gave her *life*. That's considerably more generous than someone with more disposable income than he could reasonably use that donates what is essentially pocket change for him.

      and you were saying that over 20billion was one of many donations?!?!?! Exactly what, then, were you saying was one of many? What you mentioned was the "20 billion," which is in ENDOWMENTS...which have not gone out and are all very-long term.

      Your posts are up the thread - just because I'm debunking your simple fanboyism doesn't mean you get to retroactively change your arguements.

    37. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What planet are you from that Paris Hilton is wealthier than Bill Gates?

    38. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by hughk · · Score: 1
      How much does that mean to him, not a lot and its tax deductible! I prefer the charity of George Soros - one of the reasons that so many Eastern Europeans now appreceate things like democracy and mostly don't have missiles pointed at us. He has been woring on supporting the conversion from communism of Eastern Europe over the last 15 years - yep, they have been working that long. Charity on that scale isn't "Fire and Forget" - he actively participates in the running of his charities.

      Oh what did I do, I went and stole one of his workforce whilst I was working on an aid project in Russia and turned her into my wife! This is why I know a little about what he has done over the years (it isn't nearly as well advertised in the West).

      I know Billl G is tackling aids and so on now so his money is busy - but wouldn't it be niice if someone did a "Soros" on the middle-East?

      --
      See my journal, I write things there
    39. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by diablobynight · · Score: 1

      I believe your wrong and your making statements like there facts and they simply aren't. A good business man is always in the right place at the right time. Their are thousands of industries to be in, and thousands more to come that haven't been thought of, which alots millions of right places at right times. You fail to connect the dots. You sacrifice for a woman. I have no pitty for the weak that whine about fate and luck.

      --
      Anonymous Cowards - Oh God, How I hate you
    40. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What have I done? I've wiped out the M$ crap that our school board paid THOUSANDS and THOUSANDS of dollars for, that could be much better spent in education, and replaced it all with Open Source! :) I, and others of like mind, have done far more, and continue to do far more, for education, etc. than Billy boy will ever do.

    41. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So that's why Geraldo Rivera found Al Capone's Vault to empty!

    42. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "'cause you said he started it all from scratch, when in fact, he did not."

      By your definition nobody has started a company from scratch.

    43. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably not. Without MS's insistence on being able to distribute DOS to other companies the PC clone business would probably never happened.

    44. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah and that $5000 office furniture the school board bought with the savings looks really great.

    45. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by metamatic · · Score: 1
      The fact is that before Bill Gates, there was no Microsoft, no employees, no product, no sales.

      Factually incorrect, as MS-DOS was purchased from Seattle Computer Systems, who had been selling it as QDOS; and it was then modified to be more like CP/M, sold by Digital Research.

      --
      GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
    46. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by dAzED1 · · Score: 1
      1. Again, I'm not whining. Can you quote a single line that even looks like it? I'm simply quantifying his generosity.

      2. I'm not sacraficing for a woman.
      3. I'm connecting the dots. Your first post:

      Here's a guy who started a company from scratch, and worked his way up to being the richest man in the world.

      And to top if off, he's now the most generous philanthropist too. His foundation [gatesfoundation.org], focused on fighting disease and promoting education will leave a bigger and longer lasting legacy than his business accomplishments.

      Having some buildings names after him is a small token of apprecation in comparison to his generosity.

      I've broken it down already. He didn't "start from scratch." He was born rich. He's not "the most generous" anything. He gives more money than I do, but is far less generous. As I've said many times - quantifying his generosity, not his donations. Additionally - his business legacy will FAR outlast his silly "foundation."

      You responded by trying to say that I was stating Mother Theresa wasn't generous, which was quite silly.

      Then you said "Did you ever consider that some people are generous, but that it's also nice to be remembered. Also look closer, he has donated over 20 Billion dollars to charity throughout his life. Not 20 million."

      And to that I responded that he WILL be remembered, but not for his "generosity." I also responded that he HAS NOT DONATED 20 BILLION DOLLARS. He has granted 20 billion in ENDOWMENTS. That is a HUGE difference, and it is info that I got from the site that YOU posted. Try reading it.

      So - the challenge to you: quote something from me that was whining. Show how I'm weak. I bet I could beat you at anything, really - heh. Oh, another challenge: show me what I'm "making statements like there [I'm assuming that should be they're] facts and they simply aren't." All the facts I've stated were from the gatesfoundation website! And I only stated 2 facts!

      I've toured in semi-popular bands. I've been in the Marines. I'm going off to the Peace Corps in a couple years. Got a beautiful wife, a nice house, a good job...no complaints here. First line of my first post on this little thread mentioned I dispise constant Bill-bashing. But...to think he's the "most generous" person...a quote from you, is absurd. That is all I'm arguing.

      Do you not understand what I mean when I say I'm only "quantifying his generosity?" Where am I losing you?

      And of course you can't follow through with either of those simple challenges...because they don't fit your narrow programming. You might not give me pity I neither need, want, nor deserve...but I give it to you for all three reasons.

    47. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by diablobynight · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      You've been in the Marines? I don't believe you and you may have just made a serious error. First of all if you were in the marines, I want to know a couple of things. What unit? What is the silver rectal rocket? What was your PFT score? How often did you have to PFT? What's your 7th general order? What's the birthdate of the Marine corps. You'll be able to look most of this up, but if your a marine you'll know it off the top of your head. Also what are blood wings? What is an 8 count body builder? How many counts in a marine corps push up? What happens if your in a collumn left and your in the second collumn?

      --
      Anonymous Cowards - Oh God, How I hate you
    48. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by dAzED1 · · Score: 1
      LOL...you're quite the funny one. Again, you don't retort, but instead babble. Simple challenges I give you. Back up what you're saying. Instead of responding, you call me weak, or say I'm whining. I'm not whining, I'm disagreeing that he's the "most generous" anything at all (man, dweeb, whatever). He's just a guy with a lot of money that is able to buy PR pretty easy in many different forms.

      Surely you know that I could simply look up the answers to any of your questions on the net if I /wasn't/ a formerly enlisted Marine? Would me catering to your whims make you believe me? That is to say, if I gave the answers, would it matter? I doubt it ;)

      Your claims (these are quotes from you):

      Here's a guy who started a company from scratch

      he's now the most generous philanthropist too

      By your statement...Mother Teresa is not generous

      Did you ever consider that some people are generous, but that it's also nice to be remembered.

      Also look closer, he has donated over 20 Billion dollars to charity throughout his life. Not 20 million.

      The responses, per each:

      He was born rich. He didn't start from scratch.

      He's far less generous than the average American. He donates more money, but that is only because he *has* more. The idea of quantified generosity seems to be going over your head. Generosity is not based simply on the quantiy of what is given, it has to do with how much you gave compared to what you have. If I have 2 dollars and give you a dollar, I'm far more generous than the man who has 2million dollars and gives you 10. You get more from him, and I'm not arguing that, but that doesn't mean he's more *generous*.

      Your claim about this part is highly odd. Mother Theresa gave her *life*. There is more to giving than just money.

      He WILL BE REMEMBERED...without his name on any building. The point of that statement is to debunk your claim.

      HE HAS NOT GIVEN 20 BILLION DOLLARS. He has granted that much in ENDOWMENTS. Read the website. Having worked in several npo's, I personally fully understand the difference. Grants are tangible. Endowments may or may not happen, and if they do it is in the distant future. He HAS NOT GIVEN THAT MUCH MONEY. And again, the $20mill figure was in reference to the cost of the building...you know, the one the /. article was about.

      So...by not responding, are you conceeding? Can you respond to the challenges - those of showing where I've whined, and where I've made statements you disagree with?

      And good lord dude...what the hell is "you may have just made a serious error" supposed to mean? Even if I didn't still have my dd214 in glovebox just in case (even though I'm long past the 8 total years mark, where I have to carry it with me), I fail to see how the hell any of it could be serious. How does the word "error" apply to this conversation at all?

      Yes, you definately need, want, and deserve that pity. Do you have the ability to back up ANYTHING you say? Or do you just enjoy being a Bill fanboy so much that you are unwilling to even think at all anymore? Silly "you're just whining" responses certainly don't make *me* look weak.

      BTW - pft has changed since I was in. Hell, they don't even do Mt MF anymore on the west coast during boot! I could do 110 situps in 2 minutes (I still do about 800 crunches every morning, but I don't time myself), which was well beyond the max. I can still do around 45 dead-hang pullups (I think they let people pop up nowadays?), which is above the max still if I recall right. My run time though...yeah well, I can run forever, just don't expect a max score out of me on a 3-mile short. I was just above 19 minutes, which isn't terrible score-wise, but I wasn't after "not bad" so thus the problem. I've never met a mountain I can't take though.

      Everything else, any smuck could look up online. So...wouldn't prove anything. Oh well! ;)

    49. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by diablobynight · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      I have a feeling I know your type, if you were in the Marines you were enlisted, weren't with us at OCS that's for sure.

      How did mother Teresa give her life? She lived quite comfortably. Yes I think that 20 billion dollars over ten years is very impressive. Actually I think 20 billion dollars over a lifetime would be pretty impressive.

      Your quoting a different parent when you say He's now the most generous philanthropist too. I didn't say that, look carefully at the name at the top of what your reading.

      He did start the company from scratch, having money does not make a company, I have seen a wireless ISP fold that started with 700 Million dollars of backing. So I think that your argument about his meager millions making his business what it is now, is rediculous.

      He doesn't have to donate anything at all. He isn't running for political office or anything. He chooses to donate 1/3 of his net worth. Do you donate 1/3 of your net worth?

      --
      Anonymous Cowards - Oh God, How I hate you
    50. Re:Bill Gates: An American Hero by dAzED1 · · Score: 2, Informative
      OOOOh....I see, so since I was just a simple 0311 that never got past e4, then that doesn't count. Gotcha. lol. Only officers count!

      I'm really not sure why you don't understand that he HAS NOT GIVEN 20 BILLION DOLLARS. He's granted endowments. That's it. Look ONLY at the ACTUAL dollars ACTUALLY paid out in a year. Everything else will confuse your poor little mind, like it already has.

      He didn't start the company from scratch. Read up on the history. He bought dos (he had lots of money to do it with), and the people who were going to sell a DOS system to IBM didn't show up to their appointment (they were fishing instead, I believe?). IBM was pissed, Gates was more or less standing there, and the rest is history. Once he owned the OS, the whole world was locked into his upgrade path forever (or, until now at least). IBM was not legally permitted to promote their own OS (OS/2) because of their losses in monopoly court. No one at the time realized the power of the OS, either - had the guys that missed their appt that morning with IBM actually been there, THEY would have been the ultra-rich ones. Its no more complicated than that.

      There was no building from scratch. He started with his parent's millions, and someone else's OS. Nothing scratch about that. That's a minor point anyway.

      The main point is that I've been simply quantifying his generosity...I use the same words to say that to drill it in...and have demonstrated that he's not anywhere near the most generous anything.

      I donate, as I've already explained, a FAR higher percentage of both my net worth, and my disposable income, than he does every year. HE HAS NOT DONATED 1/3 HIS NET WORTH. Get that through your thick little skull. Read his own damn website for all the proof you'll need.

  20. Not to sound mean but... by Anonym1ty · · Score: 2, Funny

    Why does this just cause a picture in my mind of someone's long lost childhood friend showing up at your door after being kicked out by his wife and broke with no job?

    I know that isn't what it's all about, but that was the the first picture that popped into my head.

  21. Hrmmm. by theM_xl · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Okay, so taking Bill Gates' credit card resulted in 3 million dollar in damages. Assuming that figure's actually correct, anyone want to bet those sites are still insecure? :)

  22. Buildings tend to be named after major donors... by blorg · · Score: 3, Informative

    As the parent poster mentions, these are often the people who have actually directly paid for them. This is nothing new. Steel baron Andrew Carnegie was not universally popular in his day, but we remember him today for his bequests, not for example his smashing of the union during the 1892 Homestead strike.

  23. why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    why is this on slashdot?

    1. Re:why by wawannem · · Score: 1

      why is this on slashdot?

      Well... I am not completely sure, but I think it is on here because and anonymous reader submitted it and CmdrTaco approved it. I'm sure there are some more mechanics behind it, but there is probably more information in the FAQ.

  24. Curador's Hack circa 2000 by handy_vandal · · Score: 5, Informative

    Gates' credit card was hacked ...

    The hack -- by Curador -- took place in 2000.

    See: PBS Interview with Curador.

    -kgj

    --
    -kgj
  25. Yea... on Melissa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "anywhere else that Billy has seen fit to leave his mark?"

    On Melissa... of course, if the boy had any sense of fun, he would be leaving mark all over the face of every SI swimsuit model, and then working on the FHM 50 most eligable women list.

  26. Bill Gates Credit Cards by MCZapf · · Score: 5, Funny

    I just can't imagine Bill Gates having a credit card. It seems so... ordinary. I always imagined that billionaires had payment methods beyond mere credit cards - like an assistant with a suitcase full of diamonds or something.

    1. Re:Bill Gates Credit Cards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have an account with Coutts and you do get a credit card, however the chances are that most buying done on it is by one of their personal assistants who'll pretty much go out and buy anything for you.

      A similar system is operated by some high street banks here in the UK. If you have quite a bit of cash, you're invited to subscribe to a black credit card scheme, which again gives you access to a personal assistant who'll remember birthdays and appropriate presents, by gifts at a moments notice, mail cards, do your weekly shop - pretty much anything anyway.

      Ironically, I don't use the Coutts service much as I'm not a public figure so don't get recognised when I'm out shopping (from what I gather, that's the point of their personal buyers), but it's great for those last minute gifts and hard to find items that you require. I don't know if they do the diamonds in briefcases though, but I can assure you they can do the briefcases with bundles of crisp notes in them...

    2. Re:Bill Gates Credit Cards by MalachiConstant · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well, there is the mythical American Express Black Card for the superrich. Is that swanky enough?

    3. Re:Bill Gates Credit Cards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A credit card with a $3,000,000+ spending limit seems better than a suitcase full of diamonds to me. Particularly for Gates, who'd be too cheap to say "keep the change" (kind of a necessity when you pay with diamonds).

    4. Re:Bill Gates Credit Cards by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      "No, I'm sorry sir, we don't accept uncut diamonds or American Express. Would you happen to have a Visa or Mastercard?"

    5. Re:Bill Gates Credit Cards by mblase · · Score: 1

      Well, the flamboyant ones either have an entourage to buy things or else only shop "at home":

      "Your suit comes to $2704.29, sir."
      "Splendid, I'll have the money for you Monday, just as soon as I have your job eliminated and your salary reabsorbed."
      "I'm sorry, sir, I must have been reading someone else's bill. Have a splendid day."

  27. Explains why gnu.org was down by GillBates0 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I posted a link to gnu.org in one of last week's stories...but it was down - for atleast 2-3 days. A reply to my comment explained that it was because gnu.org is down because the MIT CSAIL (Comp Sci and AI Lab), was moving to The Stata Center.

    Apparently, lots of machines (including gnu.org and debian mirrors) were being moved, which caused a significant outage.

    Pretty ironic about RMS moving to William H Gates building :(

    --
    An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
    1. Re:Explains why gnu.org was down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So before you trumpet OSS too much, remember who's building RMS works in...

    2. Re:Explains why gnu.org was down by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      Or look at it this way -- Gates' money is going to house systems that provide us with GNU software.

    3. Re:Explains why gnu.org was down by noahm · · Score: 1
      I posted a link to gnu.org in one of last week's stories...but it was down - for atleast 2-3 days. A reply to my comment explained that it was because gnu.org is down because the MIT CSAIL (Comp Sci and AI Lab), was moving to The Stata Center.

      Nope. gnu.org is not hosted at MIT at all:

      $ host gnu.org<br>
      gnu.org has address 199.232.76.164

      Dunno why gnu.org was down, but it didn't have anything to do with MIT. The outtages here were very short during the move. Only slightly longer last night due to some peering hosage, but certainly not on the order of 2-3 days.

      noah

    4. Re:Explains why gnu.org was down by noahm · · Score: 1
      Sorry, let me clarify, for those who don't know how to use whois. 199.232.76.164 is not owned by MIT. It is owned by cent.net, the Cambridge Entrepreneurial Network.

      noah

    5. Re:Explains why gnu.org was down by cpeikert · · Score: 1

      Nope. gnu.org is not hosted at MIT at all:

      $ host gnu.org

      gnu.org has address 199.232.76.164

      Dunno why gnu.org was down


      It still seems a bit too much of a coincidence, gnu going down exactly on the day on which (for example) debian.lcs.mit.edu was also unreachable, and the admins warned us about machines moving. Perhaps gnu.org was being hosted at LCS, but was transferred to a hosting company to coincide with the Stata move-in? Anybody know its hosting status from a few weeks ago?

    6. Re:Explains why gnu.org was down by noahm · · Score: 1
      It still seems a bit too much of a coincidence, gnu going down exactly on the day on which (for example) debian.lcs.mit.edu was also unreachable, and the admins warned us about machines moving. Perhaps gnu.org was being hosted at LCS, but was transferred to a hosting company to coincide with the Stata move-in? Anybody know its hosting status from a few weeks ago?

      gnu.org hasn't been hosted at MIT in years. Seriously.

      Debian.lcs.mit.edu was moved on Sunday, 3/14. It was down for maybe between 4 and 6 hours. If you saw any other downtime, it was coincidental (perhaps related to the upstream ISP issues I mentioned previously.)

      noah
      (one of the sysadmins responsible for moving all these machines)

    7. Re:Explains why gnu.org was down by noahm · · Score: 1
      gnu.org hasn't been hosted at MIT in years. Seriously.

      Ohh, and I can prove it, thanks to the magic of netcraft! See http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?host=gnu.org Gnu.org hasn't been on an MIT-owned IP address since Nov. 1 2000, at the latest.

      I should be lest hasty in my posts so I don't have to keep replying to myself...

      noah

    8. Re:Explains why gnu.org was down by cpeikert · · Score: 1

      gnu.org hasn't been hosted at MIT in years. Seriously.

      Neat, I believe it. Too bad it doesn't explain gnu's downtime.

  28. If I had Bill Gates credit card number ... by Sonic+McTails · · Score: 0, Troll

    I'd run Bill Gates and Microsoft into debt with all the stuff I would buy.

    --
    This signature was left intentionally blank.
  29. Damn that building is ugly. by tgd · · Score: 5, Funny

    I have a window cube looking out in the direction of the building, and it never ceases to amaze me how ungodly ugly the building is.

    And the worst part is my only other option is to look at my computer and do work, using this ungodly awful Windows system.

    Unless I go fooz, I can't get away from looking at Gates' handiwork. Ugh

    1. Re:Damn that building is ugly. by blahblah484 · · Score: 1

      I think it looks cool: http://web.mit.edu/buildings/statacenter/overview. htm

      Anyway, you gotta agree it's better than Simmons: http://web.mit.edu/evolving/projects/simmons/image s.html

    2. Re:Damn that building is ugly. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for the link. Now I know. That build is indeed ugly as sin. I imagine the total lack of structure OR aesthetics was intended to match the design of Windows.

    3. Re:Damn that building is ugly. by Hast · · Score: 1

      I think it looks like a big playground with all the toys dropped all over the place. Not hideous, and quite interesting though. Hard to say without actually walking around in the area though.

    4. Re:Damn that building is ugly. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the other one looks like Lego(tm). What's with the high-priced architects getting in touch with their inner children?

    5. Re:Damn that building is ugly. by Thurn+und+Taxis · · Score: 1

      I've been walking past this building every morning since before they tore down building 20, and I think it's pretty amazing. At first I thought "damn, what an ugly mess," but then I realized that I kept staring at it every time I walked by. If nothing else, it's not a building you can ignore.

      As others have said, the inside is really amazing, too. The parking garage, which opened last year, is as close to acoustically dead as I've ever seen outside an anechoic chamber. I saw a car drive by three rows away, and couldn't hear it at all! Compare that to just about any other parking garage, where all you hear is reverberation and squeal - there's an amazing amount of human-factors engineering in this building. That being said, though, I'm pissed that the bastards took away the view out my window.

      --
      On stereophonic equipment, the monaural sound obtained through multiple channels will enhance your listening pleasure.
    6. Re:Damn that building is ugly. by tgd · · Score: 1

      Oooo a challange. Once the weather turns and I can get my 911 out of the garage, I'll see how quiet that garage can be!

      Bet I can still set off the alarms of most of the cars I drive by ;-)

  30. Mother's maiden name by bug-eyed+monster · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    First, what a trollish summary... According to the article, Gates' CC was hacked because the alleged culprits broke into a database, not because they knew his mother's maiden name.

    Anyway... if some non-governmental org asks you for your mother's maiden name, most likely they just want to use it as a password. So just do that: give them a made-up name (but something you'll remember later).

    1. Re:Mother's maiden name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was a joke, you fucking idiot.

    2. Re:Mother's maiden name by bug-eyed+monster · · Score: 1

      Heheh yeah, I realized it after I posted the comment, consider me whooshed and idiotized. :bows deeply:

  31. Funny Story by Princess+Die · · Score: 5, Funny

    I work at Harvard and was talking to one of the deans about the Maxwell Dworkin building. He mentioned that they used the [assembly] code for DOS (they went into the archives from when Bill G was at H) as an abstract pattern for a wall mural. I asked him whether anyone had checked the code to see if there where any buffer overflow vulnerabilities. It could make the building susceptible to a worm attack. He didn't get it. Conversation ended abruptly.

    1. Re:Funny Story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was funny?

    2. Re:Funny Story by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1

      Not funny as in a rubber chicken. Funny as in rubbing a chicken.

    3. Re:Funny Story by Charlton+Heston · · Score: 3, Funny

      I also have a funny story. I visited Santa Fe a year ago and stopped to look at the merchandise of a man selling Indian jewelry on the main square downtown. One of the things he was selling was bolo ties.

      Making conversation, I said "Isaac Asimov was known to have worn a bolo tie."

      And he replied "Well tell him to get down here and buy some ties from me."

      --
      Get your stinking paws off me you damn dirty ape
    4. Re:Funny Story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      used the [assembly] code for DOS (they went into the archives from when Bill G was at H)

      Wouldn't that have to be the code for BASIC? Unless I'm mistaken DOS was bought from some other company long after BG left H and formed M$.

    5. Re:Funny Story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wouldn't that be BASIC? I'm quite sure William bought DOS sometime after he dropped out of Harvard.

    6. Re:Funny Story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Isaac were still alive, I'm sure he would have written a light-hearted science fiction trilogy based on that anecdote in about 10 minutes flat.

  32. Re:Once ..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you want female companionship, you won't find it on the Internet. The amount of trannies on the net is *enormous*. My suggestion is to go to a club, strike up a conversation with a chick and don't mention computers at all.

  33. RMS still at MIT? by k98sven · · Score: 1, Interesting

    What?

    I thought RMS retired from the MIT AI lab 20 years ago?

    That's what his bio says too.. can anyone clarify?

    1. Re:RMS still at MIT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Yes, he hasn't been an employee for twenty years or so, but he still has an office here.

    2. Re:RMS still at MIT? by SquadBoy · · Score: 5, Informative

      Basically he quit but they never made him move out and he still has offices there. Among other places it is mentioned here.

      http://www-tech.mit.edu/V110/N30/rms.30n.html

      --

      Cypherpunks: Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics. Those who live by the sword die by the arrow.
    3. Re:RMS still at MIT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny


      Yes, he hasn't been an employee for twenty years or so, but he still has an office here.


      (Welcome to academia)

    4. Re:RMS still at MIT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      It must be a glitch in accounting :)

    5. Re:RMS still at MIT? by bender647 · · Score: 1

      Rumor I heard was he's homeless and lives at MIT. :) His hatred of paying for software extends to housing too...
      ____
      For most who won't know, the Stata center was named for the founder of Analog Devices (you guys know what "analog" means, right?).

    6. Re:RMS still at MIT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www-tech.mit.edu/V110/N30/rms.30n.html

      Free Software for all who want it

      More like "manditory free software only." RMS does not want people to have a choice. He has stated on numerous occasions there should only be free software.

    7. Re:RMS still at MIT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "More like "manditory free software only." RMS does not want people to have a choice. He has stated on numerous occasions there should only be free software."

      You talk as if proprietary software gives you any hope of a choice.

  34. Just thank god.... by Captain+Rotundo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    its not the Linus Torvalds building.... all we'd hear for the next two years would be some insane analogy about how it would be like Thomas Jefferson moving into the "George Washington, founding document authors complex" - maybe even something more absurd.

    I kid RMS...

  35. From scratch? by edremy · · Score: 1
    The guy was the son of a wealthy lawyer. Went to an elite prep school then to Harvard, with all bills paid by Daddy.

    When I think of "from scratch", I'm thinking of some dirt-poor immigrant or farmer who had to bust ass even to get a basic education-think someone like Colin Powell, although even he wasn't that bad off.

    --
    "Seven Deadly Sins? I thought it was a to-do list!"
    1. Re:From scratch? by diablobynight · · Score: 1

      Do you want him to apologize for starting out with money? I always hear this. I went to a prep school, I go to a private college. What's your point. I do have loans, but if my family was rich they would pay for it, and i would be greatful to not have loans to pay off. Wouldn't you? So what's your point, having money doesn't make you smart. It doesn't mean that you'll start a billion dollar business. Look at Paris Hilton, she is worth way more than Bill started out with and all she'll end up being is a really old slut.

      --
      Anonymous Cowards - Oh God, How I hate you
    2. Re:From scratch? by edremy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm the same as you. I *didn't* start from scratch.

      I had upper-middle class parents, a Mom who didn't work outside the home and who always had time for homework. I had a decent public school to go to, then an even better private one, followed by a college paid for by my folks. (Public, so I didn't need loans.)

      Compare that to someone growing up in a single parent home, with that parent holding two jobs to pay the rent on a crappy apartment in a war zone. The nearby schools graduate kids who can barely read and have no college prep classes. College is funded totally by loans because they've got to work 40+ hours a week to live while going to school. After college, they've got a pile of debt to pay off-get a job now, no matter how bad. Failure doesn't mean that you go back and live with Daddy while you sort out your options, failure means going on welfare or being homeless.

      You are I are blessed far beyond what you think. We've got the education, we've got the parents to bail us out if we get into serious trouble, we don't have to worry about Mom losing one of her two dead-end jobs and getting tossed out of her apartment. Gates was even more so- he *never* had to worry about money, even if MS tanked. He was a millionaire to start.

      In grad school, I had a long discussion with my (black) roommate asking why there were huge numbers of blacks in med, law and engineering schools and less than 1% in my chemistry department. His answer: when you're the first kid to get this far, money matters. Money matters a *lot*- you're going to have to pay back a fortune. (And he commented that he needed to be able to give back to others as well- someone's got to help pull the other smart but forgotten kids out of the hole.) Chemistry is great for middle class white kids who can afford to not think about the bottom line.

      From what you say, you've *never* had to really think about the bottom line. Neither have I. We're lucky.

      --
      "Seven Deadly Sins? I thought it was a to-do list!"
    3. Re:From scratch? by diablobynight · · Score: 1
      Umm..at my private school, if you were a minority, never mind that your parents were rich, you could get a full ride, same with my college. So if he was paying anything for his education, he didn't score to well in comparison to the other kids at his school. Which shouldn't have been hard at a public school, but try going to my high school and being in the top 5% competing against the smartest students in the region.

      I have to think about the bottom line, so do a lot of my friends, don't compare me to you. I have to make money, my father helped me till I was 18 then your cut off, sink or swim, I bought my own car, pay my own insurance, take care of my own debt. Pull yourself up by your fucking boot straps, if your strapped for cash but your smart, join the millitary, score well on the asvab. They'll pay your way and give you lots of options.

      I don't need to hear anymore crying from the lower class, my parents both work about 60 hours a week, and were not rich nor that well off, better than some I imagine, but that's because my parents worked their asses off. All these people that blame their situation on their upbringing is bull. My dads family was on wellfare, and my mom was raised by a single mom who was a welder who lost her job when the millitary men came back from Vietnam. And then her mom developed MS and could no longer work, before my mother was even out of high school.

      My parents don't stand for weakness, or loss, me and my brothers no that, if your dealt a bad hand, play it out. Don't bitch about it.

      So what i am saying is you may be lucky, I don't believe in luck, I believe in having an IT job when I was 16, staying home and studying while other kids were out playing basketball, and learning everything I could from the books at the library and any older person I could attach myself to at work. I cut my hair short and presentable, I wore a tie, all the time, always looking presentable and professional, in and out of the office.

      I sacrificed a social life with my piers for fixing business peoples computers and helping with home networks or anything else I could to help get noticed, make friends in high places, get favors to cash in later.

      I didn't have a nintendo and only recently started to enjoy video games.

      and I am one of many, rich kids don't have it easy, when your poor, people expect nothing of you, when you get an A, the teacher all but jumps for joy, when your a good student going to a private school and you get a B, your grounded for a month and your teachers are all pissed at you.

      Everyone has it rough as a kid, no we didn't worry about starving, but there were worries, lots of them. And there are commitments, after getting my five year engineering degree, I decided to serve my country and now am a Marine, working towards officer, and working towards contacts to start my own business when I get out.

      I envy Bill Gates, I am a man of business, and I would like to pick Gate's brain on just how he thought through all the obsticals he did.

      --
      Anonymous Cowards - Oh God, How I hate you
    4. Re:From scratch? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Bill Gates is who he is soley bceause his mother new a vice president at IBM.
      Everything else was someone elses Idea.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  36. the story behind the story... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Interestingly, the new building uses RFID-based "proximity locks". This provoked a Stallman rant about privacy, including:

    The general conclusion of privacy campaigners is that information, once collected, is easy to misuse; therefore, the reliable approach to safeguarding privacy is to design systems that don't, and can't, collect information about people.

    Mechanical locks are an example of a system that can't collect tracking information. Card lock systems can also be set up so that they can't collect tracking information. If the card keys are special cards, not used for any other purpose, and if they do not identify the individuals who carry them, then the system can't be used to track people. By contrast, using the MIT ID card makes it easy to track people.

    RFIDs are bad for privacy because they can be read anywhere without your knowing it. A swipe card has the virtue that it can't be read except when you swipe it.

    Many people (including myself) agree with him: the geeky desire to play with "gee-whiz" technology is fine--- but not when it stands between me and getting my work done. Privacy concerns aside, mechanical locks are established technology that works reliably.

    This move includes all the cryptography and network security people, so not surprisingly some folks are checking out the security of the RFID system. In email, they said is looks likely that one can hop from the the information broadcast by the key cards to accessing private MIT account information, but I gather they're still investigating.

    1. Re:the story behind the story... by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Privacy concerns aside, mechanical locks are established technology that works reliably.

      I have some sympathy to that view, but I can also see the counterargument. My company just moved into a new building with a freshly-installed RFID key system. All employees had to hand in their old metal keys to the old building and get a new card or keyfob (their choice) to get into the new building.

      In our application, the new keys increase security and increase trust of the employees. First, a metal key only supports authorization, not authentication or accounting (one "A" of "AAA"). It can let people in, but leaves no record who or when it allowed to pass. There is an obvious security advantage to RFID keys.

      However, they also build a more trusting environment. If anything comes up missing overnight or over the weekend, it's trivial to know whom to start talking to - there's no shadow of doubt over the rest of the company. Since keys can be revoked at will, even new employees can be given the keys to the office without a loss of accountability, and lost keys can be disabled immediately.

      I don't see any real downsides to the new system. It's easier to use (no fumbling for a specific key during bad weather), gives more control to the employeer, and gives more access to the employees. I respect RMS' opinion, but I just don't really agree with it here.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    2. Re:the story behind the story... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I don't see any real downsides to the new system. ... [It] gives more control to the employeer [sic]

      That, I think, is exactly the objection.

    3. Re:the story behind the story... by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1
      But it gives the employer new abilities while not diminishing the abilities of the employees, and I don't see that as a bad thing. I guess my main question is this: what rights or capabilities to the RFID keytags remove from the employees (or in the case of RMS, squatters) that they should reasonably expect to have?

      I like RMS. I appreciate what he's done, and agree with even his strongest statements 99% of the time. He even sent me a personal reply when I emailed my first child's birth announcement to him. Having said all that, this is one of those 1% of the times when I understand that he's campaigning for a Freedom, but I just can't tell which Freedom is being infringed.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    4. Re:the story behind the story... by Shimbo · · Score: 1

      Privacy concerns aside, mechanical locks are established technology that works reliably.

      The security of indivudual key systems is good but realistically in campus environment you need master keys and submaster keys. You have relatively inflexible access control on submaster keys. If you think about what a master key is, it's essentially equivalent to a backdoor password. As soon as it is compromised, to regain security, all the locks that master operates need to be changed.

      This isn't just theory; when I was at college, the master key system for several of the buildings was hacked within weeks.

  37. Music as a vocation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I'm a Juilliard graduate"

    You know, I'm a very musical person, going through elementary school, high school, college, I was involved in every musical thing you could imagine.

    People kept saying "you're going to study music, right? A professor in college said 'why aren't you studying music instead of CS' (this was a music professor, before the obvious joke appears)"

    You know why? I was smart enough to know that to make it in the music biz, you either settle for low pay (music teacher, guy making diddly as a working musician), or no pay (unemployed).

    The thing is, as good as I was (and I was pretty good), I knew to make it music, you have to be so fucking good that you are an unbelievable talent, and you have to practice 8 hours a day, and blah blah blah.

    So I'm in computers for the last 30 years, and I make a comfortable living.

    I see kids that have a little musical talent going into music, and the best thign somebody should do is pull them aside and say "Son, make music, have fun with it, but don't try to make a living *-because you're not good enough-*. Its cruel to be kind, but there's nothign worse than a masters degree in performance art with some poor schmuck trying to do dinner theater for almost free at age 28, still living at home, and hoping for god-knows -what. Its pathetic. They should have become an accountant and played on weekends for fun.

    But no, they had a dream, and there's nothing sadder than when that dream finally ends at age 32 with nothign to show but scars.

    I know so many people like that...the arts are full of people with dreams bigger than talent, and somebody should have nipped it in the bud when they were 17.

    1. Re:Music as a vocation by tntguy · · Score: 0

      Simon? Is that you?

    2. Re:Music as a vocation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. Can we have buttsex?

  38. RMS = Richard Stallman? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There are a few RMSes there, and on a news site an acronym should never be used without using the full form first.

    1. Re:RMS = Richard Stallman? by tommck · · Score: 4, Funny

      You're worshipping at the FSF's altar and you ask them to define RMS?

      Let me guess... you're new here?

      --
      ---- It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again. It does this whenever it's told.
    2. Re:RMS = Richard Stallman? by Lord+of+Ironhand · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I suppose mr. Root Mean Square will be pretty angry...

    3. Re:RMS = Richard Stallman? by Araneas · · Score: 2, Funny

      Root Mean Square
      Royal Merchant Ship
      Royal Meterological Society
      Royal Microscopical Society
      or my favourite in this context:

      Microsoft Windows(R) Rights Management Services (RMS)

    4. Re:RMS = Richard Stallman? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      uh...rms is pretty much universal. Like linus. Sure, there are others, but you only need to specify if you don't mean THE linus, or THE rms.

    5. Re:RMS = Richard Stallman? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure they meant Root Mean Square.

  39. Wait this is dangerous by JohnGrahamCumming · · Score: 2, Funny

    Microsoft could have filled the building with special bugging devices that would enable them to get their hands on the code that RMS is writing.

    Oh wait.

    1. Re:Wait this is dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah, I heard they offerred him a job. They wanted him to go though specification docs and highlight duplicate features. Then, he was to to edit the duplicate feature heading to give it a more exciting name than the original.

    2. Re:Wait this is dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just FYI, RMS does not code anymore. At least not in any large manner. He might help with Emacs every once in a while, but now he's mostly doing administrative and legal jobs for the FSF.

  40. bill's credit limit by cnb · · Score: 0, Troll

    I wonder what sort of credit limit Bill Gates has on the card.

  41. RMS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For what does it stand?
    I first though the obvious one but seeing that the first link is about Ray and Maria Stata Center...

    1. Re:RMS? by kundor · · Score: 1
      Yes. Another building is moving into the Gates building. It couldn't be the famous free software leader who works in the MIT compsci department (which is relocating to the new building) whose precense there is deliciously ironic.


      fuckwit.

  42. Don't be a hater by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    So is "Levelling" some sort of scientological thing?

    If s/he really wants to make it up to you, they'll offer you anal sex or at least a blowjob.

  43. It's called sarcasm by GillBates0 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    though it was a pretty obscure attempt at it. Maybe a [sarcasm][/sarcasm] would've helped.

    --
    An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
  44. even worse by Wah · · Score: 1

    he did it back in 2000 and /. posts it like it happened last week.

    --
    +&x
  45. Two questions by mangu · · Score: 1
    1) a guy who started a company from scratch

    How much did he have to start with? IIRC, he dropped out of Harvard to start his company. Studying at Harvard doesn't exactly fit my concept of "from scratch".


    2) he's now the most generous philanthropist too

    How much does he get back in tax breaks? One of the differences between rich people and the middle class is that the rich can choose how the government spends thir tax money.

  46. Henry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    n/t

  47. Re:Vile American dogs will burn in hell! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm proud of what my government does down there. Burn, scum, burn!

  48. Re:Curador's Hack circa 2000 by vondo · · Score: 2, Informative

    And the building referenced was dedicated in 1999. So the summary was truthful, if not exactly timely.

  49. How do we know it's Gates' Credit Card Number? by mykepredko · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hmmm... Clearly some testing is required.

    Maybe if somebody could forward it, I could test it out by buying something that will prove that it is actually Gates' card.

    I'm thinking that South Dakota should be adequate for this task.

    myke

  50. Re:Curador's Hack circa 2000 by Copperhead · · Score: 1
    I was interested the $3 million figure being thrown around, wondering where the number came from, and whether he actually charged the credit cards. However, the number comes from the cost to the credit card companies for closing the compromised accounts and reissuing new cards.

    BBC article on Grey's conviction.

    --
    Your reality is lies and balderdash and I'm delighted to say that I have no grasp of it whatsoever. - Baron Munchausen
  51. Rather appropriate by fm6 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    RMS is the classic schoolyard radical. He has all these social theories that he's never had to test in the real world, because he's spent his entire professional career subsisting on grant money.

    Don't get me wrong -- there's nothing wrong with taking grant money. Just because something isn't economically sustainable, doesn't mean it's not worth doing. I just get very tired of the way the "Free Software" folk insist that they've transcended the evils of software "ownership". Which they've never actually done. Their bills are paid for by revenues from the very businesses they are too pure to work for.

    So of course RMS now works in a building that was paid for by the license fees that Microsoft gouged out of hapless computer buyers. What could be more appropriate?

    1. Re:Rather appropriate by AntiOrganic · · Score: 1

      Read the thread. He hasn't worked there for twenty years, but he's still permitted to have an office for God-knows-what-reason.

    2. Re:Rather appropriate by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Ejecting an icon like RMS from a place like that would be a small martyrdom and would probably raise more hue and cry than it's worth. Besides he's colorful, you need people like that to haunt the halls as it were. And, the man is obviously intelligent, whether you think him daft or no.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Rather appropriate by 0x0d0a · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Don't get me wrong -- there's nothing wrong with taking grant money. Just because something isn't economically sustainable, doesn't mean it's not worth doing. I just get very tired of the way the "Free Software" folk insist that they've transcended the evils of software "ownership". Which they've never actually done. Their bills are paid for by revenues from the very businesses they are too pure to work for.

      You know, it's not as if the lack of IP doesn't have prescedent for functioning. Art and science haven't had a form of property protection for most of mankind for most of our history, and knowledge production didn't stop.

      Also, I'm unsure as to whether RMS actually has the burden of justifying the feasibility of Free Software in the current economic situation (I think it's doable, but suppose it isn't). Suppose that it took a tax, .2% of federal revenue (a tenth of what NASA gets) to ensure that Free software can be produced, and that the overall benefit to mankind is well in excess of the resources spent. It would be easy to provide for federal subsidies. (Note that I'm not suggesting any particular system, just proposing a hypothetical.)

      If you want to take a strict free-market, no-academia business-only approach, very little useful research would ever be conducted, we would have fewer and lower-caliber instructors, etc.

      Look at roads. Roads can't exist as a private enterprise either. But they're so damn useful that it's worth dropping our conventional economic model on the floor to do what's necessary to take advantage of them.

      So of course RMS now works in a building that was paid for by the license fees that Microsoft gouged out of hapless computer buyers. What could be more appropriate?

      What do you want to bet that the system that handles some of Mr. Gates' vast wealth has Free software somewhere in it? The influence of both RMS and Gates is both pervasive and common. I don't think you can draw anything useful from it.

    4. Re:Rather appropriate by mclove · · Score: 1

      Yeah, getting a 5 billion dollar appropriation out of Congress in the middle of a deficit crisis for developing alternatives to commercial software that already works perfectly well for most people is no problem at all.

      Maybe if you earmarked 4.5 billion of it to go to corporate tax breaks for open source deployment and/or some poorly defined item that really just means "we'll just give it to the NSA" you'd have a shot...

    5. Re:Rather appropriate by stand · · Score: 4, Insightful
      RMS is the classic schoolyard radical. He has all these social theories that he's never had to test in the real world, because he's spent his entire professional career subsisting on grant money.

      You seem to be laboring under the impression that grant money simply falls from the sky to anyone who asks for it.

      Grant money is just as scare a resource and has as many competitors for it as, say venture capital funds. I'd say the two processes are quite similar, in fact, though the critieria for making awards is somewhat different.

      To the extent that RMS may have subsisted on grant funds is a reflection of the fact that people think his ideas have merit within the very real marketplace thereof.

      --
      Four fifths of all our troubles in this life would disappear if we would just sit down and keep still. -C. Coolidge
    6. Re:Rather appropriate by Brandybuck · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you want to take a strict free-market, no-academia business-only approach...

      Who says the free market can't have academia? While universities traditionally need wealthy patrons, those patrons don't have to be governments. Free markets would be irrelevant to academia only if academia provided goods and services that no one wanted.

      Roads can't exist as a private enterprise either.

      Completely false. Private roads do exist. The only reason they tend to be government institutions is because private concerns don't have the power of eminent domain to kick people out of their homesteads to make way for the new interstate. That's not to say that a network of private roads would be an easy system to set up, or that it would be problem free, but it is doable.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
    7. Re:Rather appropriate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is it that the "free software just can't work, it can't, it can't, it can't!" crowd always seems to think that RMS and other such luminaries haven't been able to support themselves on a commercial basis? Just a little research into RMS's history and you'd see that he was been well compensated for consulting and contract work involving Free software.

      Company has an itch, GNU software almost scratches itch, company pays RMS a big fat hourly rate to tweak said GNU software to perfectly scratch that it. Tada! Free software as a means to a commercially viable form of income. And this is no secret, no big surprise, no selling out of principles. It is the way RMS has ALWAYS said Free software should work and he has walked the walk to make it happen.

    8. Re:Rather appropriate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your post is the proof that you does not understand the FSF philosophy. Moderators too.

    9. Re:Rather appropriate by Barto · · Score: 1

      I'd agree with you... except RMS's work does stretch beyond the theory and into the technical. Think of all the GNU software that is virtually required for Linux. GCC alone.

      Plus, RMS's "Misinterpreting Copyright" essay is a work of genius. Hint: it's not as radical as his own favourite copyleft approach, he isn't the inflexible radical that many people make him out to be.

      Barto

    10. Re:Rather appropriate by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

      I won't listen to RMS tell me how to make a living with Free Software, because he doesn't know the first thing about it. He's like the quadrennial political candidate who's never had a job in his life campaigning on workers issues.

      On the other hand Michael Tiemann has a lot of real world experience making a living off of Free Software and running a profitable Free Software company. Michael's views on GNU, GPL and Free Software have a lot more relevance to me than anything RMS says.

      In fact, I would hazard a guess that the Free Software Movement(tm) would have crashed and burned without Michael Tiemann.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
    11. Re:Rather appropriate by jc42 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, getting a 5 billion dollar appropriation out of Congress ... s no problem at all.

      Hey, we folks here in the Boston area successfully got about three times that from Congress just to lower a few km of highway about 15 meters. Ask anyone from the area about the "Big Dig".

      In comparison, getting a mere few billion to build practical, useful software should be easy.

      Hmmm ... except that Congress might not understand concepts like "practical" and "useful". I know; we can push it as the basis of new game-playing software.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    12. Re:Rather appropriate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RMS is a trust fund academic.

    13. Re:Rather appropriate by the+drizzle · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Where are my mod points when I need 'em.

      RMS is the classic schoolyard radical. He has all these social theories that he's never had to test in the real world ... Just because something isn't economically sustainable, doesn't mean it's not worth doing.

      RMS wrote GCC to test some of these theories. Since then it has become the most widely-available (# of platforms) compiler around, suitable for commercial work. Linux, in which RMS's GNU software plays an integral role, is a top-tier OS, and its development is eclipsing its competition. Saying RMS hasn't worked in the "real world" is irrelevant because many have embraced his vision and have had commercial success. It's also wrong -- read about the variety of companies he's consulted.

      I just get very tired of the way the "Free Software" folk insist that they've transcended the evils of software "ownership". Which they've never actually done. Their bills are paid for by revenues from the very businesses they are too pure to work for.

      The beauty of software is that it can be copied as a very very low cost. Why doesn't our current economic model embrace this principle? Hard to say, but RMS has dedicated his life to supporting a new model, in which everyone wins.

      You clearly don't understand the almighty RMS. A lot of people don't and it's unfortunate. He is a stickler for details because someone has to be for the sake of the free software movement.

      RMS envisions a world in which everyone uses a GNUish OS not just because its free but because its the best OS available. As more and more people discover Linux and how rewarding programming can be, its development will increase. Which OS has improved the most the past 3 - 7 years? Probably Mac OS (which has embraced free software to a degree) or Linux. Clearly NOT Windows.

      The quality of free software, whose model was largely shaped by the RMS, is amazing nowadays. OpenOffice.org, XMMS, and Mozilla are fuggin smeet.

      So of course RMS now works in a building that was paid for by the license fees that Microsoft gouged out of hapless computer buyers. What could be more appropriate?

      Lordy lordy. Even if you don't get it, understand that RMS's passion is for nothing less than improving mankind as a whole. If a kid in India who happens to run across my old Pentium 500mhz (don't ask how -- i have no idea), why the hell shouldn't he get a free OS with all the latest software? What would be more appropriate will be RMS winning a Nobel Prize (w/ Linus) for improving the world just a little bit.

      Alright thats enough preaching. But stop wasting your time insulting someone without any real argument.

    14. Re:Rather appropriate by mclove · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but there's no accounting for pork-barrel stuff... billions of dollars to construction contractors in the home state of some influential politicians can help almost any big appropriation along. And the Big Dig is quite possibly history's greatest example of this.

    15. Re:Rather appropriate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RMS now works in a building that was paid for by the license fees that Microsoft gouged out of hapless computer buyers. What could be more appropriate?

      That IP protections be restructured such that companies like Microsoft don't aquire undue wealth by claiming unlimited "ownership" of code created by embracing and extending the work of others. RMS's GPL is doing the work of unraveling the congressional mismanagement of our intellectual commons. It is indeed appropriate that Microsoft's agenda be eviscerated from academia, one of the last bastions of intellectual freedom we have, gifts be damned. Don't take freedom for granted.

    16. Re:Rather appropriate by Mr.+Piddle · · Score: 1

      Art and science haven't had a form of property protection for most of mankind for most of our history, and knowledge production didn't stop.

      That's because religion was perfectly happy to make sure there was no knowledge production to stop.

      The Church stood unchallenged for hundreds of years before a long persistent trickle of resistence eventually led to the Renaissance.

      Hundreds of years is nothing to laugh at. No medicine. No science. Nothing. Art didn't even exist outside of the narrow likes of monarchs and popes. For more time than the USA has even existed.

      The reason the USA boomed so dramatically is largely due to the Constitution, which grants explicit property and expression rights. In the USA there are no monarchs, no popes, and no gallows for critics, scientists, and artists who defy tradition in the interest of innovation who can do their work without great fear of oppression or unmitigated theft.

      --
      Vote in November. You won't regret it.
    17. Re:Rather appropriate by fm6 · · Score: 1

      Well yeah, I'm perfectly happy to see RMS take grant money and use it develop free-as-in-whatever software. I'm simply expressing irritation as his belief that he's achieved some higher moral plane, even though he's ultimately dependent on the very "non-free" software industry he condemns.

    18. Re:Rather appropriate by Barto · · Score: 1

      Bill Gates donated a building to MIT. Anyone could have. You could equally say "RMS is dependant on the automotive industry" if it was (for example) a hypothetical Henry Ford building.

      I don't see how either make much sense outside +5 Funny comments ;)

      Barto

    19. Re:Rather appropriate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was following along just fine until that last paragraph where you made that huge leap of logic about constitutional protections of copyright and civil liberties being the chief source of the USA's economic success.

      Arguments with actual supporting evidence have been made that the USA's rise was due to any number of factors - geography, abundant natural resources, melting-pot effect, starting-from-scratch effect, etc. To lay everything at the feet of copyright is really quite simplistic.

  52. If he's so generous, why doesn't he DONATE ALL NOW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why is he sitting on nearly all of it? People need it now not 30 years down the road...

    Oh yeah duh...

    It's feel good PR for his company...

  53. Huh? by ChTh · · Score: 0, Troll

    RMS has a job?!? What's next, is he gonna get a haircut? So much for hippie-culture in the 21:st century...

  54. Re:Vile American dogs will burn in hell! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Prisoners who have never seen an "unveiled" woman before are forced to watch as the hookers touch their own naked bodies. One said an American girl had smeared menstrual blood across his face in an act of humiliation!

    Wow! Sign me up! Can I get that hot OSDN chink to do these things for me?

  55. Mary Gates by lannocc · · Score: 3, Informative

    Don't forget Mary Gates Hall at the University of Washington. Named after his mother, of course.

    1. Re:Mary Gates by katarac · · Score: 1

      Not as cool a building as Anthony Michael Hall at Mars University.

  56. Amber-o-file? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anybody wonder whether Steve was the grand-child of Amber-o-files? As in named after Dworkin from the Amber series from Zelazny?
    I dunno how the ages work out, but Dworkin is not exactly a common name, is it?

  57. It's been said before... by Zebra_X · · Score: 4, Informative

    It would be nice if slashdot didn't partake in the sensationalisim that tends to pervade the media. The reason I say this is is that the summary reads "Gates' credit card was hacked. After all, they did have his mother's maiden name... "
    If the moderators had read the article, they would have noted that Gates card number was not USED for anything, but that some stupid kid had it in his posession. And it's linked to a list of names stolen sometime in the past. As a result the kid was picked up by the FBI. Nothing actually happened concerning gates card.

    Bah.

  58. Umm, how about 2, no $3M by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The total losses attributable to Gray's online pranks could exceed $3 million, according to the FBI.

    I love how they come up with these arbitrarily chosen numbers for stuff.. someone tell me how they caused $3M in damages?

    Fictitious-FBI-Guy says: "Well, we had a lot of help from security consultants who charged us $250,000 to do an Arin query, than there was the matter of calling the ISP they used (it was long distance) and it took the ISP people awhile to find the information we needed.. erm, well we didn't pay them anything, but if we did that would have accounted for some of it.. and of course there was expenses, like food and car rentals and stuff.. it really adds up you'd be surprised"

    I hope the estimated cost to "fix" the problems in the systems exploited (that were there before) isn't counted as resolving damages.

  59. Dreyfoos Building... by BookRead · · Score: 1
    I think he's in the Dreyfoos Building not the Gates Building according to the map. The Stata Center has a bunch of buildings (reduced irony quotient). And the AI Lab has merged with LCS as CSAIL so they're all together now.

    If they're using RFID security that will surely be a step down from the old Building 20 days of random interdisciplinary wonderfulness. They've gone from a basic barracks that no cares about so you can do whatever to Pritzker Prize winner (Gehry) hyper-designed everything must be just so. RMS is a pain but he's usually right. I expect much lower real creativity there. But it will look cool, a monument to the dot bomb years.

  60. It's supposed to look like that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The picture looks more like they were in the process of knocking it down rather than just completing it.

  61. Gates ain't all that and a bag of potato chips. by Ithika · · Score: 2, Insightful
    How about you have a big cup of shut the hell up until you've donated a few billion to needy causes?

    I fail to see how much he's given away has any bearing on the situation. He still has more money, by many many orders of magnitude, than me and everyone I personally know all put together. More than will pass through my and my acquaintances' hands in our lifetimes, I don't doubt. He's not going to want for money for the central heating in his dotage, is he? So pull him down off that pedestal, for God's sake.

    He's a greedy and conniving man, with very little respect for the human race as far as I can tell. He does not deserve our admiration or our defence.

    1. Re:Gates ain't all that and a bag of potato chips. by CarrionBird · · Score: 1

      Lemme see...

      Giving money = good, but doesn't overcome the crime of being rich.
      Being rich = evil
      Being richest = satan

      What would he have to do to abosolve himself of his horrid crimes (making a lot of money off crappy software)?

      --
      Free Mac Mini Yeah, it's
    2. Re:Gates ain't all that and a bag of potato chips. by SnappleMaster · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "very little respect for the human race"

      Gates may not be an angel but wtf are you talking abot? Are you implying he is a sociopath, a mass-murderer, or what?

      What have you done lately to demonstrate *your* "respect for the human race"?

      And for the record, I have very little respect for the human race myself. Does that make me evil too? I guess not - I'm not uber-wealthy.

      --
      Be happy. Nothing else matters.
    3. Re:Gates ain't all that and a bag of potato chips. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Give me a break,

      He's pledged to give over 90% of his money away and he has no respect for the human race?

      I'm sorry, those two do not go together.

    4. Re:Gates ain't all that and a bag of potato chips. by Ithika · · Score: 1

      "And for the record, I have very little respect for the human race myself. Does that make me evil too? I guess not - I'm not uber-wealthy."

      Well, I guess it does make you evil. You don't like people, and by your own admission too. You do not value human life, nor hold in any regard those about you. You don't sound like a very nice person to know, do you?

    5. Re:Gates ain't all that and a bag of potato chips. by Ithika · · Score: 1

      "What would he have to do to abosolve himself of his horrid crimes (making a lot of money off crappy software)?"

      That should be fairly obvious, as you've answered the question yourself. Stop making lots of money off crappy software. There are evidently plenty people out there who can write good software for free, why can't the richest man in the world (who I'm constantly told is so smart) get any of them motivated and organised enough to write any of his software well?

      When he's dead and gone all he'll be remembered for is poor software and a large bank account. Even if he gives it all away by the end - what will that have achieved? Probably the fastest area of technological discovery these days (maybe behind biotech/genetics these days, but whatever) and all the Microsoft Corporation can do is stagnate the industry. I find that incredibly sad.

    6. Re:Gates ain't all that and a bag of potato chips. by SnappleMaster · · Score: 1

      "I have very little respect for the human race myself" does not equate to "I do not value human life".

      I may consider you to be an idiot, but if you were about to die I would still save your life if it was in my power. Lack of respect does not make someone evil. You need to stop being such a moronic extremist and realize that we aren't all either Darth Vader or Luke Skywalker.

      Anyways, you sir, are a troll. I'm sorry that Gates (and me apparently) fall into the "blackest of evil" groups in your mental utopia. I wish you well. I hope you one day get the therapy you deserve. ;)

      --
      Be happy. Nothing else matters.
    7. Re:Gates ain't all that and a bag of potato chips. by Ithika · · Score: 1
      (Well, wherever you get that 90% figure from, you can keep it. But anyway...)

      If you think giving money away means you have respect for the human race you must lead a very shallow existence indeed.

      "Cutting the space budget really restores my faith in humanity. It eliminates dreams, goals, and deals and lets us get straight to the business of hate, debauchery, and self-annihilation."
      -- Johnny Hart

    8. Re:Gates ain't all that and a bag of potato chips. by perlchild · · Score: 1

      eh? *naive look*
      make "some" money writing uncrappy software?

    9. Re:Gates ain't all that and a bag of potato chips. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, I feel deeply sorry for you. You will have a miserable life.

    10. Re:Gates ain't all that and a bag of potato chips. by Ithika · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry you regard me as a troll. I do not mean to inflame the conversation, merely fan ;)

      Anyway, I know little about you so maybe the above statements were somewhat OTT. Maybe you do have some regard for society, maybe you don't. But as you say yourself we're not uber-wealthy and it's rarely our type who get to mould the way things are.

      However, I still stand by what I said about Gates. He clearly can, in so many ways, do a great deal of good for society. But he feels the urge to use his resources attempting to retain his stranglehold on the desktop OS market and elsewhere. Surely you can see what good can be done from such a position of power.

      But as with all dictatorships, the end becomes retaining power rather than using power, for good or ill. But then, as I get told daily, I'm just a cynical bastard.

    11. Re:Gates ain't all that and a bag of potato chips. by CarrionBird · · Score: 1
      I know of plenty of people who do a piss poor job and I don't hear people saying they are the epitomie of evil.

      And where is this stagnation? I see advances, maybe there would be more if someone else would have won early on, maybe not. OSS is making strides, with or without MS's help. Not all of thier software sucks goats either.

      We're still down to the assertion that his riches make him evil, reagrdless of what he uses them for.
      --
      Free Mac Mini Yeah, it's
    12. Re:Gates ain't all that and a bag of potato chips. by Ithika · · Score: 1

      "We're still down to the assertion that his riches make him evil, reagrdless of what he uses them for."

      If it was me that said that I didn't mean to... but I'm pretty sure I didn't. If so, I apologise for misleading you. The actions maketh the man. How he got those riches and what he is using them for are both very good things to judge him on. Not the number of zeroes in his bank balance. (Otherwise we'd have to blame people for inheriting fortunes. Whether this actually happens outside fairy tales is a moot point.)

    13. Re:Gates ain't all that and a bag of potato chips. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you think history is going to give a rats ass about the quality of MS software, you're greatly mistaken. In 50 years if Gates is mentioned at all they'll probably say that he invented the PC or the Internet.

      As far as the quality of MS progammers is concerned, it would be quite easy for them to develop a Unix clone like Linux and make it at least as secure and stable. The market wants backward compatiblity with Windows, however, so they have a job that is several orders of magnitude more complex then merely a "me too" version of a 1970's technology.

    14. Re:Gates ain't all that and a bag of potato chips. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He already did that in the late 1970's and early 1980's. Since then it has been his employees writing the uncrappy software.

      Of course, if by "crappy" software you mean software the normal people buy and use, then MS does have crappy software.

    15. Re:Gates ain't all that and a bag of potato chips. by hughk · · Score: 1
      I wouldn't be crital of Warren Buffet. He is a shrewd investor, but mostly of other people's money and they benefit. Nobody complains about his business ethics. George Soros is definitely poorer, but as I have already said, he has been giving money away for some fifteen years now for the support of people (not politicians) in eastern europe. A wealthy man, who broke the pound, but nobody holds it against him.

      Billy G has behaved lik a shark from the beginning. He certainly never went near an ethics course. The thing is that whilst I have a certain admiration for Buffet and Soros - I certainly don't for Mr Gates. Funny that?

      --
      See my journal, I write things there
    16. Re:Gates ain't all that and a bag of potato chips. by Ithika · · Score: 1
      Quality (reliability, security) comes first, then backwards compatability if it doesn't compromise the former.

      Have you ever asked anyone whether they wanted a simple, reliable system, or a complex, flaky system and got a response you weren't expecting? It's fairly plain to see that if that were the choice (rather than, do you want the next version of Windows which will be better, or something you don't know) people always choose what you want them to.

      As for providing backwards compatability it hasn't taken Apple too long to migrate their systems (and related developers) to a totally new environment with backwards emulation. Granted there exists a certain Mac-owning buying ethic which the rest of the world will never quite understand - but that doesn't mean the principle isn't the same.

      It is not too late. If we thought it was what would the point be in any of this? If computers could never progress beyond ever-more-complex, silted up and kludged MS systems... would there be much point in trying? Is that where you see computers in 50 years time?

    17. Re:Gates ain't all that and a bag of potato chips. by Nick_dm · · Score: 1

      You can't take your money with you when you die anyway. It's better than leaving all of it too his children but it still doesn't stop the fact that Microsoft is, to a large extent, a dead end in the economy. More of that money flowing through other software companies would be a much better situation. His desire to maintain Microsoft's grip of the software market with some very questionable business tactics certainly doesn't imply respect (and the fact that many other businessmen would do that doesn't change that fact, a fair few of them don't respect customers either).

    18. Re:Gates ain't all that and a bag of potato chips. by ClosedSource · · Score: 1

      There are two fundamental ways to go. Kludge current OS's like Unix/Linux or Windows into the future or throw out backward compatibility and use our best knowledge to create brand new systems.

      The fact that the open source guys chose the former rather than the latter approach despite the fact that they have total freedom and don't have to answer to anybody for quarterly profits indicates that we will be tweaking old systems for a long time to come.

    19. Re:Gates ain't all that and a bag of potato chips. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "More of that money flowing through other software companies would be a much better situation."

      Proof?

  62. Jesus: NOT An American Hero! by Dystopian+Rebel · · Score: 1, Funny
    Here's a guy who started from scratch and... got himself killed.

    He came from a broken home. Mom married a woodworker and then fooled around on the side with the Holy Spirit. So his biological daddy was powerful but JC never got to be President. Didn't serve in the army, neither.

    He tried to do some nice things but only in a naive, small-scale way. Didn't do nothing fer the gross national product. Now Henry Ford... there's an imagination!

    Ok, I'll give you that some of his idears helped found some really big monopolies after his death. But then, he wasn't around to enjoy the gravy. What kind of heroism is that?

    --
    Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
    1. Re:Jesus: NOT An American Hero! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Theory:

      RMS = Jesus

      Proof:

      Jesus - long hair, no job, crucified by the authorities for his beliefs.
      RMS - long hair, no job, crucified on Slashdot every day for his beliefs.

      Therefore RMS = Jesus

      Q.E.D.

  63. Its a perk for being richest man on the planet by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    Hey, hes got more money then most countries, of course he feels the need to leave his mark.

    And with that cash, he gets too.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  64. THREAD IS OVER (n/t) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    foo

  65. The article is biased by wurp · · Score: 1

    Well, here was my reply to the article...

    Regarding the story about the kids who hacked Bill Gate's CC number... the way you tell the story, it's obvious you want us to feel the kids are deeply in the wrong. "Well sorry buddy" demonstrates a bias and a lack of eloquence disturbing in someone purportedly reporting.

    As you tell it, I can't see that they did anything that should be criminal, quite honestly. If the three million dollars in damages is because they bought things with the credit cards, or because they used them maliciously, then that's one thing. If the three million dollars is because now the companies they cracked have to clean up their security, and the CC holders have to get new numbers, that's quite another.

    What would you say should be done when someone reports to a company "your site is insecure; anyone could steal from your customers" and they ignore it? Just assume the company will do the right thing? Or do something to make the companies take notice?

    The crackers may well have been doing something illegal and immoral. But when I read a story with such obvious bias and leaving out critical details, I assume the writer left out the details because they don't support his bias.

    1. Re:The article is biased by Draknor · · Score: 1

      As you tell it, I can't see that they did anything that should be criminal, quite honestly. If the three million dollars in damages is because they bought things with the credit cards, or because they used them maliciously, then that's one thing. If the three million dollars is because now the companies they cracked have to clean up their security, and the CC holders have to get new numbers, that's quite another.

      I really wondered about that too - where did they come up with this $3mil figure? Was this a result of malicious use, or did they use the same monetary damage calculator the RIAA, SPA, and SCO use (ie inflated, arbitrary amounts that are grossly out of scale to the real costs)?

      The crackers may well have been doing something illegal and immoral. But when I read a story with such obvious bias and leaving out critical details, I assume the writer left out the details because they don't support his bias.

      Agreed - so much for journalistic integrity!

  66. What? by valkenar · · Score: 1

    > There's also the current issue with Windows Media
    > Player. Tried to find anything else out there to
    > compete with it?

    There are lots of alternative players. I prefer winamp, personally and that plays video with playlists just fine. How about Blaze Media Pro? Have you tried that? As a matter of fact, my computer at work (HP Pavilion) came bundled with one, MusicMatch Jukebox I think it was.

    I don't totally disagree with all the points you made, but there are alternatives to Windows Media Player.

    1. Re:What? by Maestro4k · · Score: 1
      • There are lots of alternative players. I prefer winamp, personally and that plays video with playlists just fine. How about Blaze Media Pro? Have you tried that?
      I've tried Winamp, I like it for music, hate it for video myself. I hadn't heard of Blaze Media Pro, I'll give it a loot. My main concern is that all the alternate video players seem to be nothing more than skins over WMP, so you still aren't getting rid of it.
    2. Re:What? by spectecjr · · Score: 1

      My main concern is that all the alternate video players seem to be nothing more than skins over WMP, so you still aren't getting rid of it.

      You mean that, like Windows Media Player, they're all just thin skins over the DirectShow libraries?

      Oh mercy! That's so horrible!

      Now, please tell me: how many Linux media players are merely thin skins over libavcodec?

      Do you know the difference?

      Somehow, I doubt it.

      --
      Coming soon - pyrogyra
  67. How about a copper coin? by stomv · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This may sound corny, but I'm of the opinion that somebody who donates 10% of their meager substainance is far more generous than somebody that gives away 90% of his luxury, leaving him with, well, luxury.

    It's nice that Gates is giving away money -- even if it was obtained dishonestly/unethically/illegally. However, to applaud his gifts is a bit silly methinks. The money he gives has little value to him, in the sense that it cannot be used to greatly improve his quality of life. Therefore, his gifts have cost him little.

    So, from my perspective: he gives away plenty of money, but isn't at all generous with it.

    1. Re:How about a copper coin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There will be always disgusting people accusing Bill Gates of earning illegal or dishonest money, but those pigs, fortunately, do not have any proof of that, except the fact that all the proof from them show that they are idiots and disgusting pigs. How on earth do you attack a decent programmer from making a fortune from his hard work. Through the slashdot made-up news? You have to learn how to live with dignity and decency before attacking others. I don't know why we have so many such idiots and disgusting, dishonest, immoral people on the open source, but open source fortunately doesn't include just you.

    2. Re:How about a copper coin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow. Anonymous Coward himself has questioned both your intelligence and your non-membership in the species S. scrofa. I hope you have the good sense to not show your face around these parts. Anonymous Coward wields a lot of influence around these parts.

      Yes, I am an imposter.

      You bring up an excellent point, though. What could the aspiring Christmas shopper give Bill Gates to significantly improve his quality of life? He can travel wherever he wants. He can meet anyone he wants. He can have every movie ever made available on his home theater, so DVDs are out. A free day at the local spa for him and Melinda? Nothing he couldn't buy himself if the mood struck him. A private island? Again, if he wanted one, he would have one. Anyways, once the novelty wore off, he'd be hopping a jet to the nearest five star hotel.

      At the point where you can have anything you want, the only thing that's left to want is to not feel guilty about having everything you want. Hence, even the disinterested rich will turn to philanthropy, and they will give at whatever level satisfies their consciences.

      With $27B in the Gates Foundation, Bill isn't a slouch in that department. But you're right. He could give away 90% of his fortune, and still impact his quality of life less than if I donated $100 to the FSF.

      Remember basic economics, pig-accusing cowards: The first dollars you earn are the most valuable, because they always go towards absolute necessities. Additional dollars are less valuable because they will be always be put towards something less valuable to you. In other words, the difference between eating at home and eating out matters far less than the difference between eating and not eating.

    3. Re:How about a copper coin? by mandolin · · Score: 1
      but I'm of the opinion that somebody who donates 10% of their meager substainance is far more generous than somebody that gives away 90% of his luxury

      Well, what if it was 1% and 99%, respectively? There has to be a limit somewhere.

      More generally, I personally think there is also something to be said for how hard the person worked to obtain what they end up giving away. Somebody who worked their ass off only to give 90% of their money away is more generous than somebody who inherited all of their wealth, even if they inherited less. BillG's lawyer dad notwithstanding, I think we can put Bill himself solidly in the "worker" camp.

  68. Re:Bill Gates building by TioHoltzman · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Hey asshole, how about a goddamn warning on a link like that?
    Jesus, I've lost my apetite for weeks now.

  69. Gates at CMU by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    heh. Though reportedly Bill Gates did not take the Knoppix CD with him.

  70. Shut up and finish the HURD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ah, so the HURD is 20 years late because Stallman was busy packing.

  71. Publicity by nonameisgood · · Score: 1

    While that is a great idea, remember that the motive is not strictly creating excellence, or the donation could be anonymous, or at least not carry a name of his/her choosing.

    The goal is to one-up the other donations in both amount and prestige. This escalation accounts for the growth of giving in the richest circles. Rich people don't give away money (one reason that they are rich), they buy influence and recognition for themselves, their families and businesses. They also attempt to rewrite legacies, as another /.'er pointed about the oil and steel barons.

    The "Bill Gates Center for Ethics" at Prairie View A&M University would not get the recognition that anything at Harvard or MIT would get.

    --
    Check out "The Natural History of the Rich: A Field Guide" by Richard Conniff

    PS: Preview and proofread, so your school actually looks good. Don't tell us how bad they (other school's grads) are, show us how good you are.

    --
    Faith is the very antithesis of reason, injudiciousness a critical component of spiritual devotion. Jon Krakauer
  72. RMS' new desk is in the basement... by carambola5 · · Score: 1, Funny

    he was heard saying:

    *mumble* I'll burn this place down *mumble*

    --
    IWARS.
    People, in general, disappoint me. Politicians even more so.
    1. Re:RMS' new desk is in the basement... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Landscaper: The shrubery keeps dying.
      Security: Video tape appears to indicate a tall
      harry fellow keeps pissing on the
      shrubs when he enters and exits.

  73. Gates building at Michigan Tech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you sure that was named after Bill? I visited MTU several times in the late '70s and early '80s and I remember that building (and its name). Bill wasn't quite the big swinging **** he is now, so it's likely that the tennis center was named after someone else.

  74. Get it right people.. by kemster · · Score: 0, Troll

    The official name is the MICROSOFT/Gates Building, and RMS will not dignify other names with a response. I mean, Gates wouldn't have any money without Microsoft, so you can't have one without the other!

  75. Re:"I AM A GOAT FUCKER!" -Richard Stallman, 1994 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It was Diogenes, not Socrates, that lived in a barrel.

  76. Re:Vile American dogs will burn in hell! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
    But worst of all is the use of vice girls to torment the most religiously devout detainees...

    Are these the same "religiously devout" folks who get promised 72 virgins for all eternity if they strap a bomb to themselves and blow up a few kindergartners?

  77. Either this is a bit early ... by cookie_cutter · · Score: 1

    ... or my calendar is 8 days too fast

  78. BFD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
    What's sad is bill Gates has donated well over twenty billion dollars to charities

    BFD.

    How'd he get that $20 billion? That matters even more.

    1. Re:BFD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By selling the most popular software in the world?

  79. no solidarity. by jonnymac · · Score: 1

    harvard won't name a building after living donors. i don't know
    why bill and steve chose "maxwell-dworkin," but gates-ballmer
    was never an option.

    so much for the solidarity "theory."

  80. Easy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Harvard: Yo momma.
    The OSS Community: Word!

  81. Anonymous FTP by kubalaa · · Score: 1

    First, anonymous ftp is good because (unless you use SSL or some such) login information is sent plaintext which is in some sense worse than not logging in at all.

    Second, undeletable folders? There's no such thing. You can use quotas to limit the space people can use up on your FTP site and/or have a script to clean it out at regular intervals. It is sad that people you don't know will happily use your FTP site, but that's life on the internet.

    --

    "If you look 'round the table and can't tell who the sucker is, it's you." -- Quiz Show

    1. Re:Anonymous FTP by diablobynight · · Score: 1

      actually there is undeletable folders. You see raw FTP commands can create folders that windows can't see or understand. look up google on folders named lpt, or even worse folders beginning and ending with space.

      --
      Anonymous Cowards - Oh God, How I hate you
  82. named after Gates' and Ballmer's mothers.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A building named "Bitch"?

  83. Torvalds Building by kc0re · · Score: 1

    Can we, as Slashdot users, make a Torvalds building?

  84. How? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I mean that's an assload of money. You could buy several small nations, arm them, and then command them to go to war against each other and still have $40 billion left.

  85. Gates' credit card? by blair1q · · Score: 1

    This borders on the apocryphal.

    Why would Bill Gates even have a credit card in his own name?

    And why in hell would he use it online, instead of a one-time electronic transaction instrument?

    And just what was he buying?

  86. Re:sweet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Preferably ones that spray Zyklon-B for the dirty kike.

  87. not quite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    To say that it's Bill's fault that his CC numbers is stolen is on the same level as saying that a girl diserved to get raped for wearing a sexy dress. Asshole or not, he is the victim and not the perpetrator.

    No, it's more like the CEO of the nations most widely used body gaurd service being raped. The dude who's been selling his software to banks as "secure" aught to be ashamed at how poor a job he's done.

    Your bud Twitter at work.

    Kiss my ass, troll.

  88. Let me (hopefully) be the first to say.... by vranash · · Score: 2, Funny

    RMS now has plans to daily enter Bill Gate's through the back door, and occasionally the front as well ;=P

  89. Well, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I made a couple billion knocking over 7/11's.

    ( I figured out how to make that scale, dude. )

    Anyway, it is all OK, as I donated most of it to charity. Right?

  90. M-x psychoanalyze-borg ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or maybe M-x assimilate-pinhead ?

  91. Not Nearly So Black and White by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you move into a crime infested neighborhood, put your valuables in plain sight from the street, didn't lock your door, and announced to everyone about your arrival, people would call you an idiot for being so naive as to do such a thing. If *you* put *my* posessions in such a condition, I would want to sue you for negligence.

    Of course the Internet is the "crime infested neighborhood" in this example. The problem is, it is so crime infested, and the scale of what you might put into the compromised state is so much bigger (e.g. credit card #'s, personal information, etc.) The stakes are higher, so people are going to try harder--and for little incremental effort on their part.

    To anyone who knows better, it is so unconscionable to act unsecurely over the Internet, that people who do are flaming idiots--especially when they complain.

    No, it is not your fault someone else broke the law--but you sure didn't help yourself.

    If someone walks into your unlocked house in the crime infested neighborhood to leave a little memo that says a crack addict is about to move into your basement, I say Thank You!

    1. Re:Not Nearly So Black and White by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, you have the right from pragmatic standpoint.
      If you get run over while you're in the crosswalk, the fact that you had the walk light is rather irrelevant; you're dead.
      Please, though, let's keep in mind that this does not justify vehicular manslaughter. It is a very unambiguous thing; vehicular manslaughter is wrong.
      All of you creeps with the Oliver Twist ethic that "it's only stealing if you get caught" will, eventually, learn, one way or another: you are always caught, for God's eye doesn't blink.
      If YHNL, you are wrong, and may He be merciful when He calls your past into account.

  92. other side of the coin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about the prosperity Microsoft brings to 55,000+ employees? Health benefits, matching 401K contributions, stock grants, etc? People can earn a great living making software at Microsoft. The shareholders of the company benefited from a top-notch growth stock that is now starting to pay dividends as a way to return earnings to shareholders.

    The company he founded produces great benefits for its employess, resellers and investors. What's so evil about that?

    1. Re:other side of the coin by Ithika · · Score: 1

      But the same goes for any large corporation. (Not that MS are even any good in this regard. Read up on their relationship with temping agencies if you want to know where the money inside Microsoft and many other big companies goes.)

      But really you're avoiding the issue. He makes large amounts of money from selling very poor software for *no* reason. That looks like avarice and sloth to me - and you say he's not evil :)

  93. RMS rents office space at MIT. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I thought RMS retired from the MIT AI lab 20 years ago?"

    RMS rents office space at MIT.

    For example, here is an old news item archived at:
    http://www.gnu.org/bulletins/bull6.html

    "Hewlett-Packard is giving us $100,000. This money was given to us to make sure that we have funds to rent office space for several years. "

  94. Inside looks better by cpeikert · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Everyone likes to bash how ugly Stata is on the outside. I like the way it looks, but I can see how others might not.

    But, you really should walk through the "Student Street" area before making up your mind. It's pretty breathtaking: a big, open hallway with various corners of other buildings (made of brick, reflective aluminum, glass) sticking through the ceiling at odd angles. Walls painted with several strong, basic hues. Classrooms with cool polka-dotted echo-proof wood panels all over the walls (though these might give a headache after awhile). Lots of swooping stairwells that take you up to places where external walls from another building cut through the glass ceiling and continue all the way through the floor.

    It's like a carnival funhouse. Soon to be inhabited by the carnies.

  95. Re:Curador's Hack circa 2000 by shadowmatter · · Score: 1

    Details can also be found here, including the credit card number and Bill's hard-to-guess password.

    (But don't get too excited, the card expired long ago.)

    - shadowmatter

  96. News: RMS demands it be called GNU/Windows by Glasswire · · Score: 1, Funny

    ...after discovering that GNU applications are being used on Windows.

  97. Re:Buildings tend to be named after major donors.. by DennisInDallas · · Score: 1

    Nor for his (& Mellon's) culpability in the Johnstown flood...

    http://www.johnstownpa.com/History/hist19.html

  98. To be temporarily renamed. by �berhund · · Score: 1

    I'm sure the Gates building will be a popular target for being renamed in the middle of the night. Here are the suggestions that I've come up with:

    -The What Do I Want The World To Do Today Building
    -The Richard M Stallman Building
    -The Linus Torvalds Building
    -The GNU/William H Gates Building

    Of course, because it's MIT, few people will notice that it actually has a name, and will continue to refer to it by number (seriously).

    --
    -Uberhund
  99. You're missing the point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Credit cards are for gay people.

    Cash is for men.

  100. don't let your left hand know what your right hand by DennisInDallas · · Score: 1

    I do all my charity works anonymously... I've never build anything as big as the MaxDork tho.

  101. two questions: by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

    1) Since when is simply breaking into an ecommerce site and taking cc numbers cause for 3 million in losses? What'd they do, soak up that much bandwidth? Or did they actually use the cards and distribute the numbers? There's no mention. Sounds like an inflated figure to fuck them up.
    2) What exactly is wrong/illigal about having someone else's credit card number? Sure, I know using it is illigal, but simply having a list isn't, is it? If so, certainly it's not something that would fall under "intent to use/distribute," no?

    --
    ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  102. Digital Research by DennisInDallas · · Score: 1

    CP/M on steriods

    1. Re:Digital Research by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And not very good steroids, at that.

  103. Not just buildings, but also courses. by SYSS+Mouse · · Score: 1

    M$ had (or attempted to) sponsor(ed) new courses here, in Universirty of Waterloo. Public opinion forced the University and M$ to redesign the sponsorship.

  104. Gates/Carnegie by DennisInDallas · · Score: 1

    I like the comparision of Gates to Carnegie. I had always kinda lumped him him with Edision, founder of a technology company that used "hardball" business tactics to assume ownership of the I.P. of the (workers|indentured servants) and squelch the competition.
    The earlier comparison to Carnegie is interesting too, tho. Will M$ prosper post-Gates the way that G.E. has?

  105. GNU/William H. Gates building by Leoric · · Score: 1

    its not William H. Gates building, its GNU/William H. Gates building.

    Muhahahahah!

  106. Do a google for "RMS" - he's #1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do a google for "RMS" - he's #1

  107. Hmm, his finger will get tired... by kundor · · Score: 1
    From Salon.com:

    When Richard Stallman gave Bill Gates the finger in front of Stanford's computer science building, I got nervous. No, it wasn't the real Bill Gates -- it was just his name, engraved in giant letters over the main entrance to the 2-year-old, Gates-funded building.

    [...]

    "Hey," Stallman called out to a graduate student opening the door in front of us, "is it the tradition here to give Bill the finger whenever you go through these doors?"

    The student looked over his shoulder, twitched a nervous smile and disappeared inside. Stallman shrugged -- and right there on the spot decided to start his own protest movement. As we entered the building, out came what the ancient Romans used to call the "digit impudicus." Stallman flashed me a sly grin.

    1. Re:Hmm, his finger will get tired... by BCW2 · · Score: 1

      I wish I'd been there to see it, I would probably have joined him.

      It's enough to make you wish that Gates proctologist has very large fingers.

      --
      Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.
  108. Sure. by ZxCv · · Score: 1

    Got $300 million?

    --

    Perl - $Just @when->$you ${thought} s/yn/tax/ &couldn\'t %get $worse;
    1. Re:Sure. by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Got $300 million?

      Sure, I'll just steal Bill Gates' credit card number!

  109. Re:Vile American dogs will burn in hell! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nah, they are placed with those guys though. Instead of 72 virgins, they get 72,000,000 furnaces to stoke while being peed on by pigs. Then they have to bathe in pig shit.

  110. RMS is using MS funds to attack MS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So MS foundation donates a building to MIT, and RMS has no ethical dilemma using this building to further his mantra that proprietary software is bad?

  111. George Soros? by hughk · · Score: 1

    George Soros made a lot of money out of his financial speculations (including that one against the pound). He doesn't have the Bill Gates level of wealth because his charitable organisations (Soros Foundation and Open Society Institute) have been eating between 300 and 500 million dollars pro year since about 1989. Check out their web site for further details. His contributions are totally unrelated to his commercial activities.

    --
    See my journal, I write things there
  112. LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'Baited' was right, so yeah, lots of irony.

    1. Re:LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, bated is correct... short for "a"-bated, meaning stopped, like "holding one's breath waiting for the outcome".

    2. Re:LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't come the raw prawn with me! I know the old joke, "a cat ate some cheese and waited for a mouse with baited breath."

  113. More news from your alternate universe by ClosedSource · · Score: 1

    I heard that MS got the pharmaceutical companies to give free drugs to Open Source developers to slow down the competition too. By the way, have you been working on any Open Source projects lately ...

    1. Re:More news from your alternate universe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      have you been working on any Open Source projects lately

      Yes. That's one free clue, so you're no longer clueless.

      MS is a banana republic. They have one product: IP. That's *all* that they have. Without IP protections, the whole castle crumbles. Gates deserves credit for exploiting current IP law to the fullest. He didn't write the laws, he just took advantage. Good for him. Nevertheless, the protections granted to the owners of so-called "intellectual property" go to far, and stand on the greater public good.

      Gate's money does indeed turn attention away from the problem facing Africa: how to get enough medicine. The straightforward answer is to allow multiple companies to manufacture the medicine and resell it on the open market. That's capitalism. Crony protections that last indefinitely, in the case of AIDS in Africa, literally kill people.

      Have you ever been to an AIDs clinic in Africa?

      Relaxing (I didn't say eliminating) the protections afforded global oligarchies would allow Africans to recieve the same benefit that Gate's billions provides. So why is Gates spending all this money, when simple reforms that were being seriously discussed would have served the same purpose?

      Who's living in an alternate universe?

    2. Re:More news from your alternate universe by ClosedSource · · Score: 1

      "Who's living in an alternate universe?"

      It's still you.

      There are plenty of ways that Gates can protect MS's IP that are cheaper and more effective than helping to buy AIDS drugs in Africa. The only context in which MS's IP is at any kind of risk has to do with anti-trust, and I don't see how drug company patents are going to help there.

      Furthermore, there's no proof that Gate's money is deterring countries from allowing generic versions of AIDS drugs and in fact a number of countries have already taken that step.

      If you were an AIDS patient in Africa would you want to sacrifice yourself for an experiment to determine if a lack of drug money would accelerate the process of developing generic alternatives?

  114. OK, I'll bite by CarrionBird · · Score: 1
    What unethical thing is Billy G doing that these other rich guys aren't?

    Employing a crapload of programmers in his own country instead of the latest cheap labor country?

    Putting other companies out of business for his own companies benefit? That's nothing new, and it's certainly not against what every business school teaches.

    Using barriers to exit to lock in customers? Again, standard MBA teachings.

    All of his high crimes are things that nobody would write an article about your average businessman doing.

    I'm not saying that guy's any hero, but to crucify the guy for doing what most of his competetors would do if they were in the same place is lame.

    Demanding his head on a stick for giving 20B when he could have given 40B (pulling numbers out of my ass) is very lame. Some would not have given it at all. (and some would have given more)
    --
    Free Mac Mini Yeah, it's
    1. Re:OK, I'll bite by hughk · · Score: 1
      Yep, you can be a complete bastard legally, but don't expect to be loved for it. It appears that even if the US government was bought off, the EU hasn't been yet which is why Mircosoft is being fined there.

      Your average businessman doesn't have to worry about anti-monopolistic behaviour. Those that do, take careful advice on how not to beat the opposition into the ground. His company is in dock again for their monopolistic behaviour, and although he has bought the US government off, the EU comes a little more expensive (too many scattered politicians to buy at once).

      The reason I compare Gates with Soros, is that Soros didn't wait until he was being forced to give money away (or being advised by his accountants). I don't hold the amount against Gates, I hold the way it was given with possible linkages to the inroads that open source was making in some countries (and maybe certain universities).

      Which brings us back to Ethics. They teach it these days even at the big busines schools. Sooner or later, if you ignore the ethics, you will eventually lose.

      --
      See my journal, I write things there
    2. Re:OK, I'll bite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Sooner or later, if you ignore the ethics, you will eventually lose."

      So if Gates dies the richest man on earth, I guess that will prove that he didn't ignore ethics, right?

  115. Gates Tennis Center at MTU by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As a student of Michigan Tech I know that Gates Tennies Center is not named after Billy Boy.

  116. Pissing on SC Building? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you sure that wasn't Ozzie Osbourne?

  117. Still not there. by edremy · · Score: 1

    You had two parents. You had seen a computer before you were 16, so you could actually get a job doing something other than flipping burgers. Your parents bootstrapped themselves: so did mine, but by the time you (and I) came along they had a solid work ethic and valued education. You could even join the military like I did and unlike many of the folks who grew up in shitty neighborhoods. (Police records, don't you know)

    I don't doubt you busted ass to get where you got- I did too. But neither of us started at the bottom.

    We've got a woman at school here who grew up in a Masai village. Normal schooling for girls stops at about the 3rd grade- after that you help your family on the farm and get married at 15. (And there's intense pressure from both parents and tribal elders to conform to this ethic) She didn't have running water, or electricity, or a computer, or very many books for that matter. She's going to graduate this spring with honors and wants to go on for a doctorate. She's going to get it too.

    That's starting from scratch.

    --
    "Seven Deadly Sins? I thought it was a to-do list!"
  118. Does anyone else realize how pathetic this looks? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Let's look at the sequence of events here:


    1) Gates and company develop OS that, while it may have its flaws, is priced and marketed effectively, and results in a computer on every desktop. It's _arguable_ that another OS could have done this, but the fact is that MS Windows is what did it. What proves that MS was so effective at this? The fact that Bill Gates is so rich. Like it or not (and I like it), in the US system riches are (at least in the long run) proportional to how much other people are willing to spend on your efforts. If you want to see the alternative to this, look at the Tycho and Enron executives, or look at Russia or Cuba.


    2) Gates and company generously fund universities, and help support RMS, who, while he may be a brilliant programmer, has been unable to come up with a method for even getting paid for his work. And, I would argue, his work is far less valuable than what Gates and company has done, because very few people in the world actually use RMS's work as compared to windows. This despite the fact that RMS denounces Gates as evil, and spends his time trying to build a replacement to windows. Of course, Gates was not funding RMS in particular here, so much as academic freedom in general.


    3) Gates is roundly insulted with every name in the book (see the other comments in this thread).

  119. In other news... by zakezuke · · Score: 1

    Hackers with Bill Gate's credit card ordered from the Adam and Eve catalog... now access to and from his home is now impossible due to the vast number of free gifts they send.

    Bill Gates is seeking asking that this be considered a DOS attack, and approperate criminal charges be pressed. Meanwhile this Saturday there will be a massive garage sale in Bellevue.

    --
    There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
  120. Before the roar of chuckling becomes too loud... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Before the roar of chuckling becomes too loud on the incredible irony that MIT would have a "Bill Gates Tower" and that RMS will work in it, it should be noted that at MIT the names of buildings are rarely used, and only occasionally even widely known. Instead, this building, like most others at MIT, will most likely be referred to by its number, "Building 32".

    |>oug

  121. Perhaps RMS is not so unbelievable after all. by jbn-o · · Score: 1

    He has all these social theories that he's never had to test in the real world, because he's spent his entire professional career subsisting on grant money.

    Actually, RMS said that at one time he made enough money from distributing free software for a fee that he could live on it. He also mentions that he lives inexpensively. So, not only did he test these theories in the real world, he lived on them.

    I've never had a job since quitting MIT in January 1984. So, [in 1985] I was looking for some way I could make money through my work on free software, and therefore I started a free software business. I announced, "Send me $150 dollars, and I'll mail you a tape of Emacs." And the orders began dribbling in. By the middle of the year they were trickling in.

    I was getting 8 to 10 orders a month. And, if necessary, I could have lived on just that, because I've always lived cheaply. I live like a student, basically. And I like that, because it means that money is not telling me what to do. I can do what I think is important for me to do. It freed me to do what seemed worth doing. So make a real effort to avoid getting sucked into all the expensive lifestyle habits of typical Americans. Because if you do that, then people with the money will dictate what you do with your life. You won't be able to do what's really important to you.

    He also earned awards which paid well and allowed him to do interesting things with the money. This is a far cry from the description you offer which tries to make it sound like he has no idea what he's talking about.

    To this day other organizations have tested these theories in the real world, and now there is an operating system one can run that proves his theories do work in the real world.

    I just get very tired of the way the "Free Software" folk insist that they've transcended the evils of software "ownership". Which they've never actually done. Their bills are paid for by revenues from the very businesses they are too pure to work for.

    Do you mean businesses like IBM, Red Hat, SUSE, and Novell? I think many people work for those businesses. In what way was has free software not "transcended the evils of software ''ownership''"? The most popular free software license (the GNU General Public License, or GNU GPL) grants us all the freedom to do virtually anything we want to do with the software, certainly the majority of things most hackers want to do most of the time, even though these hackers don't hold the copyright to the program they are improving or sharing.

    1. Re:Perhaps RMS is not so unbelievable after all. by fm6 · · Score: 1

      So RMS actually thinks he could live off his open source activities if he had to? I'm reminded of various counter-culture types I knew back in the 70s. They were so proud of their ability to survive without all those material things we wage-slaves wasted our lives earning the money to pay for. Of course, they would have been in a pretty pickle if we'd all followed their advice, since they were dependent on us for things like access to a telephone and the occasional hot shower.

    2. Re:Perhaps RMS is not so unbelievable after all. by jbn-o · · Score: 1

      So RMS actually thinks he could live off his open source activities if he had to?

      No, absolutely not. As he has said many times now, RMS doesn't have anything to do with the open source movement. He even said as much in the transcript I pointed you to before ("I do free software. Open source is a different movement."), he was correcting an introduction that included the same error you made.

      But he has already shown that he can and does live off his free software developments. Perhaps you didn't know that the free software community--which RMS founded over a decade before the open source movement began--started with his work on a number of still-popular free software programs including Emacs and GCC.

      Of course, they would have been in a pretty pickle if we'd all followed their advice, since they were dependent on us for things like access to a telephone and the occasional hot shower.

      I fail to see how this applies to free software (which seems eminently practical) or RMS (who seems incredibly wise, looking back at his fight for software freedom over the past 20 years). I also think there's a serious imbalance of credit being taken for all the problems brought on by large-scale modernization you refer to. Finally, can you point to any evidence where RMS rejects modernization simply because it is available? Even RMS' post about the security system at his old building had to do with being unnecessarily (and, I'm guessing he would argue unethically) pushed into exclusion.

  122. Greenfall by fm6 · · Score: 1
    So fine, RMS excels at the competitive world of grant proposal writing. Is that supposed to make his hypocritical attitude towards IP more palatable?

    Though, come to think of it, grant money does sometimes fall from the sky. I think that it's expired by now, but RMS used to be a MacArthur Fellow. This is a grant that's designed to provide a certain kind of people with a proper income, no strings attached. You can't apply for this fellowship -- you just go out and do things that impresses the foundation. Whereupon they call you up and inform you that you're on their books, and they need to know where to send your monthly check.

    (I knew a women who this actually happened to. First she thought it was some kind of scam, and wouldn't return their calls. Then she found out it was legit and had a minor breakdown. She was a struggling grad student, and the sudden change in circumstances was, well, disorienting.)

    When the MacArthur Foundation does stuff like this, I'm usually gratified, because they seem to like to subsidize people who make life more interesting for the rest of us. And I suppose RMS is just the kind of person such a program was meant for. But this once I question whether they really did him, or us, a favor. By further insulating him from economic reality, they promoted the aspects of his philosophy that I, for one, find most arrogant and irritating.

    1. Re:Greenfall by stand · · Score: 1

      More palatable? I don't think so. But his ability to attract money (and controversy) does, I think, make is ideas more worthy of serious consideration. As much as I'd like to think otherwise, I don't think any of my ideas are worthy of a MacArthur "genius grant." (not that I'd turn one down, mind you).

      I'm not sure I'm completely on board with RMS either, but I think there's a possibility that he's right and for that reason, I'm glad that he's there (and finding the means to sustain himself).

      --
      Four fifths of all our troubles in this life would disappear if we would just sit down and keep still. -C. Coolidge
    2. Re:Greenfall by fm6 · · Score: 1
      The main thing we owe RMS for is founding the Open Source mode of development. Except that's not at all what he meant to do. In fact, he despises Open Source, which he considers a poor imitation of his "Free Software" concept.

      As a software engineer, I have to consider RMS overrated. To be fair, he's probably a better programmer than I am -- by a factor of 100 or so. But even to me, it's apparent he doesn't understand the concept of sturcture. Usually when I need to hack somebody else's code, they compartmentalized it enough so I can change something without causing too much damage. But the last time I tried to add a feature to a GNU utility, I took one look and ran the other way!

  123. Nice misplaced rant dickhead by bogie · · Score: 1

    Did I say anything about locking anyone up? Btw I love your blame the victim defense.

    "For you jackasses" "YOU dumbasses" "you mindnumbingly dimwitted moron"

    I'd love to see you say that to my face. Too bad we'll never meet in real life. You fuck yourself asshole.

    --
    If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
    1. Re:Nice misplaced rant dickhead by the_mad_poster · · Score: 1

      Oh, boo-freaking-hoo. Did I touch a tender nerve? I find that sort of amusing since I didn't say anything about YOU in particular. So, what does that mean? Well, you're either taking exception to my "misplaced" rant (which we'll address in a minute here) or you mentally put yourself into that group of whiny crybabies who read half a Schneier book, built up a "security" system of smoke and mirrors, and paid the price. Which is it, I wonder?

      As for the "misplaced" rant - why yes, if you only look at it in relation to the PARENT post... YOUR post, why yes - it IS misplaced. Of course, context is not so simple, and when you place it into the context of the entire THREAD and consider the fact that I didn't address YOU in particular, then it's not so misplaced, now is it?

      So, I wonder - which one of us is a big crybaby peeing his pants? Me? I flew off the handle and went on a tirade about morons with the overall security knowledge of an artichoke who scream bloody murder that these idiot children need to be turned into examples while the real theives could easily be slipping right over the gates unseen. Or, is it you? You, who just automatically flew off the handle on the assumption that YOU were one of the "dumbasses, jackasses, and morons" being referenced? Hmmm? Telling tale, isn't it? Made MOST interesting indeed by the fact that I didn't say a damn thing about YOU in particular unless you're one of the idiots I was complaining about.

      Say that to your face? What, are you threatening me through the Internet? Are you the AC troll from my journal maybe? If so, fear not - go ahead and post under your ID - just because you Foed me doesn't mean you can't say something interesting that I might want to read and think about. Odds are I'm not going to subscribe and block anyone.

      And you know what's most amusing about that? Face to face - I'd probably just ignore you and walk away if you started getting... "unpleasant". My time is not flexible enough to deal with people who have egos that are so horribly brittle that they just assume anything bad that is said is being said about them.

      --
      Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
  124. Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    On a strangely unrelated note, shortly after Harvard, in a laudable attempt to retain solidarity with the Open Source community, dedicated the Maxwell Dworkin building (named after Gates' and Ballmer's mothers respectively), Gates' credit card was hacked. After all, they did have his mother's maiden name...

    Edited:
    On a strangely unrelated note, shortly after Harvard dedicated the Maxwell Dworkin building, named after Gates' and Ballmer's mothers respectively, Gates' credit card was hacked. After all, they did have his mother's maiden name...

    What does Harvard dedicating a building to Gates' and Ballmer's mothers have to do with them trying to gain credibility with the open source community? Non sequitur, eh?

  125. I had a class there by conan776 · · Score: 1

    Gee, yeah -- big windows all around the front come to think of it.

    maxwell-dworkin

    Also, they have a blow up a few pages of Willie's homework assignments hung in the foyer. His implementation of BASIC I think?

    --
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." -- Philip K. Dick
  126. Re:all the posts by galahadthreepwood · · Score: 1

    hey there r 2 people involved here W.H.G. and RMS
    but most posts here seem to be about Gates only
    looks like Gates has monopolized this post too
    lets call it the "W. H. Gates" post :-))

  127. They have a holodeck ! by The+Famous+Druid · · Score: 2, Funny

    Check out the map at http://www.csail.mit.edu/resources/maps/3/381.gif

    I'd be more than happy to bear the shame of the building name, if I got to spend my lunchtime on the holodeck !

    --
    Quidquid Latine dictum sit, altum videtur (anything said in Latin sounds important)
  128. Stallman is *NOT* moving into the Gates building! by Bob+Hearn · · Score: 4, Informative

    As someone else has pointed out, the Stata center (which is the new building complex housing CSAIL) contains both the Gates tower and the Dreyfoos tower. However, the poster incorrecly stated that RMS will be in the Dreyfoos tower. In fact he is in the space between the two towers - known as the "warehouse" space (for reasons which escape me).

    Office location in the Stata Center can be identified by letters attached to the office number. Stallman's office is 32-381, here:

    http://www.csail.mit.edu/resources/maps/3/381.gif

    (I'm right across the hall, in 32-386.) A Gates office would be, e.g., 32-G585. A Dreyfoos office would be, e.g., 32-D585. Yes, as someone else pointed out, we have a holodeck. :-)

    Most of us are hoping / assuming that, like almost all other buildings at MIT, the new building(s) will be referred to by number, not by name.

    IMHO MIT missed a great opportunity to influence the world for the better by publicly snubbing Gates' offer to fund (a small part of) the new building. But, I'm told, that's just not the way things work...

  129. Good lord by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    What a bunch of whining, jealous retards.

  130. Re:Black AMEX by Jasa · · Score: 1

    I've recently recieved an AMEX issued by Westpac (in Australia) which is a very dark shade of grey (background) and with lighter slades of grey in backgroud, it looks great!

    --
    -Jasa -- Linux - The SOURCE will be with you, ALWAYS
  131. renewing credit cards by jago25_98 · · Score: 1

    I've had similar thoughts to this such as why not develop a system where a credit card can be renewed every month, every week, or after every transaction.

    You're free to do this, but they probably won't like it. I can see that my expiry date has changed from 5 years to 1 year with my latestest issue, so I think even the credit card companies can see the benefit.

    "in order for them to be able to charge me again, I would need to give them a totally new transaction key"

  132. Gates' Credit Card by Scroatzilla · · Score: 1
    They were caught by a joint investigation of the Federal Bureau of investigation, Welsh police, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and Internet security consultants.

    Is it not badass, getting arrested by a dude in red driving a moose?? Or is it all the Molsons I've been housing?

  133. Who says they spent money on Gates's card? by fizbin · · Score: 1

    The only reference I find in the article is that an FBI estinmate says that "damages from these online pranks could total $3 million".

    But, you know, that's damages as in overcharging manpower costs, estimating server downtime at some bizarre cost/hour basis, and multiplying it by everyone in every one of these affected companies who looked at the story on the company dime.

    Nowhere have I seen any claim that these kids themselves actually bought or attempted to buy anything with these cards.

    Perhaps you have a different source?

  134. Do I have to Open any Gates to enter the premises by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    May be ?