Slashdot Mirror
Virtualization May Break Vista DRM
Nom du Keyboard writes "An article in Computerworld posits that the reason Microsoft has flip-flopped on allowing all versions of Vista to be run in virtual machines, is that it breaks the Vista DRM beyond detection, or repair. So is every future advance in computer security and/or usability going to be held hostage to the gods of Hollywood and Digital Restrictions Management? 'Will encouraging consumer virtualization result in a major uptick in piracy? Not anytime soon, say analysts. One of the main obstacles is the massive size of VMs. Because they include the operating system, the simulated hardware, as well as the software and/or multimedia files, VMs can easily run in the tens of gigabytes, making them hard to exchange over the Internet. But DeGroot says that problem can be partly overcome with .zip and compression tools -- some, ironically, even supplied by Microsoft itself.'"
Since when is .zip going to be usefull *at all* in compressing a fucking multi-gigabyte VM??
"Encryption allows Alice to send a message to Bob that can't be viewed by Jack."
Wait, "Jack"? Who uses Jack? It's usually Alice and Bob communicating with each other and Eve (short for Evesdropper) that wants to listen in. I've also occasionally seen people use Chris, but never Jack.
Someone is, one of these days, going to have to explain why 'amnesty' is such a horrible idea.
We want to stop illegal immigration. I'm somehow failing to see how barring people who came here illegally from coming here again is at all useful. Those are, after all, the people who want to be here and who already know how to function here.
And if this 'No amnesty' crap is just a way to say 'Cut off all immigration', then say that, because right now your position makes no sense at all. If you mean 'Seriously crack down on illegal immigration and don't have any sort of guest worker or residency program', well, that at least makes sense, although the agriculture industry will crucify you. Saying 'have a guest worker program...that excludes the people who've been doing it for decades', that's completely incomprehensible.
It's akin to legalizing prostitution...except for anyone who's ever been arrested for it before. It doesn't seem to make a lot of sense.
And saying 'They're criminals, we don't want them.' is stupid. The punishment for coming here illegally is to be deported. All proposed immigration reforms require they do that,and pay a rather large fee. Aka, they 'served their time'.
If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
That's the only reason I can think of for trying to derail the whole thing.
There is one question that people in the immigration debate can differ on: How many, and under what rules, will we allow workers into the country?
Everything else is basically a non-issue. We obviously need to crack down on employers hiring people illegally, we'll worry about a damn fence if we need one after changing the rules (Um, duh. It's stupid to build fences that you don't end up needing.), trying to compel English is an idiotic politic stunt, etc.
Anyone raising other questions besides 'We don't need that many (or 'we need more') guest workers.' or 'They should or should not be eligible for citizenship.' is a fool trying to derail immigration reform so they can continue to exploit people.
Especially the 'amnesty' people, who think they're doing it because they're racist idiots who don't want any immigration. Yes, you read that right. They think they're doing it because it will magically get rid of the dirty Mexicans, but they are actually doing it because big business wants to continue to exploit people.(1) So the right, puppets all of them, are parroting some inane and nonsensical objection to 'amnesty' which doesn't make a damn bit of sense. The end result, of course, will be continuing exactly the absurd situation we have now.
But, hey, as long as that 'amnesty' gibberish continues to tear the Republican party apart, I'm all for it. If it actually does get derailed, hey, we can fix it in a year and a half.
1) Something like half the issues on the right are like this. They claim it's for one reason, they secretly think it's for another reason, but in actuality it's for a third. Like objecting to government health care: They claim it's because they want a small government and it won't work, they think, secretly, it's a good way to keep the poor poor, but in actuality it's because the health insurance industry wants to continue to exist.
If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
Pay a rather large fee? Have you any idea what it costs to immigrate the LEGAL way? Compared to that, it's not a large fee by any means.
What the hell are you gibbergabbering about? That is the fee to enter legally. The fee they would pay to enter legally is the fee required to enter legally. What is this, some sort of anti-tautology argument?
I'll tell you what's so horrible about amnesty. Every immigrant doing it the legal way still has to face the difficulties of the system and some will no doubt be deported for crap as insignificant as undelivered mail (which they tried to do to my wife) while politicians try to "fix the problem" by giving illegal immigrants the right to stay.
If 'every' immigrant doing it the legal way will face that, then ones who previously attempted to enter illegally, but are now here legally, would also be facing it. Duh.
And Z visas have almost no chance of passing the House, and, if they do, they'll probably have a touchback requirement attached. But, more to the point, guest workers only get to be here three years in a row regardless, so it's not any sort of permanent residency.
Of course, as of this moment, the bill hasn't passed the house, and who knows how the differences will be ironed out. But the Democrats aren't going to go along with the Republicans more silly suggestions, although pretending the Republicans all want amnesty is just craziness.
It may have been easier if my wife had entered illegally. And that's just what I can't stand, the fact that they're making it easier and arguably better to do it the wrong way. Just this one time, again.
Well, don't blame the Republicans for trying to pass this bill for the insane backlog and hoops to jump through for legal immigrants, blame the people who have, for the last two decades, consistently underfunded immigration servi...oh, nevermind. You got the right people after all.
If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?