Prohibition was the catalyst for the Mafia's rise to power. You could blame the government for creating the very profitable black market, or you could blame the people buying the alcohol.
But a good portion of Americans were buying the alcohol anyways... not because they supported organized crime, but because they had always bought alcohol before. The government was the one that made the change, so I think they were responsible.
Should programmers be able to refuse to write code that harms the public more than it helps?
In most countries, including the US, you already can refuse to write any code you don't want to write.
And how do we protect such programmers from being dismissed unfairly for standing on principle?
You can't. If somebody hires a programmer to write something, and they refuse for whatever reason, there is no longer a reason to employ that person (except maybe in larger companies, which may or may not allow you to work on something else). When you work for somebody else, you do what they want, otherwise there is no value in the deal for them. If you want to write whatever you want to, just don't work for anybody.
He recognizes that the networked global economy is forcing market values into areas where they don't properly or historically belong, from copyright to publishing to medicine to the law.
Patents and copyrights are not "market values". They are mechanisms that exits to help make companies more powerful. They are only possible through the power of the government.
How do you think huge corporations like AOL-Time-Warner make it so big? Don't you think all of the govenment regulations (i.e. the FCC) as well as copyright law played a large part in their success?
Legal scholars like Lawrence Lessig see the GPL as a major cornerstone of a vast, global "digital commons." So far, this vision has failed to materialize. In fact, new software is creating personalized, fragmented, narcissistic media in which screening and blocking (products, people, differing opinions) has become widely accepted, even epidemic.
Maybe this is because the GPL is so far from a "free" license that many people are willing to just write their own software than to be under the numerous obligations placed upon them by the GPL.
It's on slashdot because, in addition to "news for nerds", slashdot is a forum for anti-capitalistic viewpoints.
At least he realizes that many governments are corrupt. Unfortunately, he fails to realize that this is the reason why corporations like Enron survive as long as they do.
Oh, and in one sentence he talks about how bad the government in Afghanistan is... then later he wants that same government to provide electricity and [uncensored] internet access to its people! It's absurd!
I think that corruption can be simplified in this manner:
Corruption = Power * CorruptionFactor
I think the CorruptionFactor is *relatively* low in the US (but FAR from 0), but the US politicians have a lot of power, so that hurts us as well.
We are in *much* more trouble one way
on
SSSCA Hearing
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
As the story said, we are in trouble either way. However, we are in *much* more trouble if a law is passed.
With many of us using Linux, there would always be ways around the protection. However, if the law is passed, we are in big trouble. I quote from one of the articles:
"The Hollings bill, called the Security System Standards and Certification Act (SSSCA), makes it a civil offense to make or sell digital technologies that do not contain what it calls "certified security technologies," built-in systems that prevent the copying of content." How many programmers are going to release something for free that might land them in prison for 5 years?
When you buy a game, you can look on the back. It may say "Windows", it may say "Nintendo 64", it may say "Playstation", it may say "Macintosh" or even "Linux".
You don't HAVE to buy that game. There are millions of games out there. True, some are better than others. If one game is REALLY good, then you either have to buy the system it was written for, OR convince the game company to port it to your platform. YOU chose to buy the game, the GAME COMPANY chose to write it for Windows. I don't see how this is Microsoft's fault.
At one time, all I had was an Intellivision and a Commodore. I REALLY liked Zelda and Super Mario Bros. However, I didn't have a Nintendo. Nintendo had almost the entire console market share... yet I don't remember any anti-trust cases against them. Even so, they have lost that market share since, all without the "help" of the government.
As far as the browsers go, I use Netscape on Linux. However, Netscape sucks and IE is much better. But, I can either put up with Netscape or switch to Windows. I CHOOSE to put up with Netscape. You CHOSE To use IE over Netscape on your Mac. Even so, you didn't pay MS any money for it anyways, so the point is moot.
I agree that some of Microsoft's business practices MAY be in violation of US law. However, just because you break an anti-trust law doesn't mean you are a monopoly. In fact, the anti-trust laws are arbitrary laws passed by the government, and they don't affect whether or not Microsoft is a monopoly (which it isn't). This is one example of many where Government involvement is NOT needed. We are taking care of Microsoft ourselves... why do you want to change that?
GREAT point! Microsoft brings in TONS of money every year. This is because people send them money. Microsoft can NOT take your money without you giving it to them.
Slashdot readers in general surprise me when talking about Microsoft and its anti-trust case. This is because these readers, in general, should be very aware of the great success of Linux. Most of us know that Linux is a superior operating system compared to Windows. Most of us have seen Linux steal significant media attention and market share from Microsoft in recent years. This happened because America is a "capitalistic" country (only about 50% capitalistic anymore).
You see, because of the free market, people all over this country have switched to Linux. Nobody forced them to do so... they do so because Linux is better for what they want to use their computer(s) for. Unfortunately, for the average (i.e. dumb) user, Windows is still easier to use and more convenient than Linux. We are working to change this, but at the current time, the average person that uses Windows will tell you that, yes, it sucks (i.e. unstable, slow, etc), BUT these they are willing to live with these problems for the ease of use.
Yes, Microsoft is a giant. Yes, they try to make money. Yes, they try to gain market share. But THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO DO in a free market! If businesses didn't try to make money, we would still be riding trains everywhere and building our own homemade computers.
Microsoft WILL fall by the way any company in a free market falls... by a better product taking away their market share! You can't expect this to happen overnight, as Microsoft has a HUGE userbase. And, in my opinion, they are still the best product for some people.
So, how can you, after seeing how the free market has allowed Linux to come in and cause serious damage to Microsoft's server market share, go crying to the government to interfere with capitalism at work and manually break up Microsoft?? The truth is that Microsoft is the BETTER product for many people to this day... and that probably pisses you off, and you don't want to accept it.
I hate Microsoft. I want to see them fall as much as you do. However, when they fall, I want them to KNOW that it was Linux that took them down... that it was a better product developed through the use of open source, that took down the giant! If the goverment goes in and breaks them up before we win, then they will just blame everything on the goverment instead of Linux. In 100 years, it will be the government that stopped Microsoft, not Linux.
We are making such good progress, why would you guys want the government to stop the war when we are on our way to victory?
I have never been FORCED to give Microsoft any money. In fact, the only person that has EVER
forced me to give them money is the government via taxes (one of these days, I'm sure I will be robbed, but not yet). In fact, I don't think ANYBODY has been forced to give Microsoft their money... yet Microsoft takes in tons of it. This must mean that there are still tons of people that CHOOSE to give them money for one reason or another. We need to find these reasons and stop them ourselves.
The government is NOT the answer!
Some of you have the illusion that you (or anybody else) were forced to give your money to Microsoft. If you think so, post a reply and tell me how it happened, and we'll see if we can see how you were forced.
First of all, with that TV, you are really wasting
its capabilities if you don't use a Progressive-Scan DVD player with it, as it can take the signal. Also, be sure you are using S-Video at the least, and preferably the Component video for the connection from the TV to the DVD player.
Also, note that if you are (or decide to) use the
Component video (highest quality) connections from your DVD player to your TV, no receiver in that price range will be able to switch it. This means that you will have to use the S-Video input on the TV for everything *but* DVD, and then use one of th Component Video inputs for the DVD player (and the other Component Video input should be saved for an HDTV tuner).
That being said, I'm not sure if you want to spend $1500 on just the Receiver, or on the receiver and speakers. When I bought my first system, I had the same price limit, but I ended up spending about $2000 instead. I bought some great speakers from Definitive Technology (www.definitivetech.com) - I got the Pro200s for the front, Pro100s for the rear, ProCenter200, and the 15TL+ (15", 325Watt/RMS Sub). I got all of that for about $1500. Then, I bought a Yamaha receiver for about $500.
I think that Yamaha provides the best sound for the money in the $700 range (for a receiver).
However, if you want to get in the $1000+ range,
I like my Harman Kardon (which eventually replaced my Yamaha).
I switched to Dvorak after having many problems with my hands. Now my typing speed has increased from ~75wpm to 105wpm and my hands feel better than ever. As I'm a vi junkie, I also swapped the caps-lock and the ESC keys, as I never use caps-lock. This has caused me problems when using other machines besides mine (especially when I am telneting and using vi on those machines) more than Dvorak has (especially since you can't possibly make this change on Windows). I did also get myself a good chair (The Aeron by Herman Miller) and the MS natural keyboard and a Logitech trackball. I don't have any problems at all now.
I was happy with the article in general... especially the detailed log of how the hacker broke in. It is true that CGI scripts can potentially be security holes in an otherwise very secure system. My only problem with the article, however, is the treatment of the Red Hat official updates. You mention that there is no central place to find "linux" updates. Well, there is. Red Hat provides a central source for all of their official updates. This is the same thing as Microsoft providing its Service Packs. Red Hat guarantees that these security updates are okay to apply to your system... and, in fact, they don't release them unless you *should* install them on your system. You mention the program "AutoRPM" (I'm the author of this program). The best way to use this program is to have it regularly (i.e. every night) check the official set of updates from Red Hat and apply them if new ones come out. What you do, however, is configure AutoRPM to check the PGP signature of the updates before it applies them. When Red Hat releases security updates, the patches are signed with their private PGP key. If you configure AutoRPM properly, it will use Red Hat's public key to check this signature. In other words, with only a few changes to the default config file, you could have setup AutoRPM to automatically install *official* and *verified* security updates from Red Hat. The only reason this isn't the default configuration is that PGP doesn't come with Red Hat (due to US export restrictions on cryptography). If you would have spent the 5 minutes to properly install and configure AutoRPM, the Red Hat Linux machine would *not* have been hacked (at least not in the way it was) because the cron security exploit would have been automatically patched by AutoRPM. - Kirk Bauer
Slashdot Mirror
Prohibition was the catalyst for the Mafia's rise to power. You could blame the government for creating the very profitable black market, or you could blame the people buying the alcohol.
But a good portion of Americans were buying the alcohol anyways... not because they supported organized crime, but because they had always bought alcohol before. The government was the one that made the change, so I think they were responsible.
This parody drug war ad is funny:
The Drug War
Patents and copyrights are not "market values". They are mechanisms that exits to help make companies more powerful. They are only possible through the power of the government.
How do you think huge corporations like AOL-Time-Warner make it so big? Don't you think all of the govenment regulations (i.e. the FCC) as well as copyright law played a large part in their success?
It's on slashdot because, in addition to "news for nerds", slashdot is a forum for anti-capitalistic viewpoints.
At least he realizes that many governments are corrupt. Unfortunately, he fails to realize that this is the reason why corporations like Enron survive as long as they do.
Oh, and in one sentence he talks about how bad the government in Afghanistan is... then later he wants that same government to provide electricity
and [uncensored] internet access to its people! It's absurd!
I think that corruption can be simplified in this manner:
Corruption = Power * CorruptionFactor
I think the CorruptionFactor is *relatively* low in the US (but FAR from 0), but the US politicians have a lot of power, so that hurts us as well.
As the story said, we are in trouble either way. However, we are in *much* more trouble if a law is passed.
With many of us using Linux, there would always be ways around the protection. However, if the law is passed, we are in big trouble. I quote from one of the articles:
"The Hollings bill, called the Security System Standards and Certification Act (SSSCA), makes it a civil offense to make or sell digital technologies that do not contain what it calls "certified security technologies," built-in systems that prevent the copying of content."
How many programmers are going to release something for free that might land them in prison for 5 years?
When you buy a game, you can look on the back. It may say "Windows", it may say "Nintendo 64", it may say "Playstation", it may say "Macintosh" or even "Linux".
You don't HAVE to buy that game. There are millions of games out there. True, some are better than others. If one game is REALLY good, then you either have to buy the system it was written for, OR convince the game company to port it to your platform. YOU chose to buy the game, the GAME COMPANY chose to write it for Windows. I don't see how this is Microsoft's fault.
At one time, all I had was an Intellivision and a Commodore. I REALLY liked Zelda and Super Mario Bros. However, I didn't have a Nintendo. Nintendo had almost the entire console market share... yet I don't remember any anti-trust cases against them. Even so, they have lost that market share since, all without the "help" of the government.
As far as the browsers go, I use Netscape on Linux. However, Netscape sucks and IE is much better. But, I can either put up with Netscape or switch to Windows. I CHOOSE to put up with Netscape. You CHOSE To use IE over Netscape on your Mac. Even so, you didn't pay MS any money for it anyways, so the point is moot.
I agree that some of Microsoft's business practices MAY be in violation of US law. However, just because you break an anti-trust law doesn't mean you are a monopoly. In fact, the anti-trust laws are arbitrary laws passed by the government, and they don't affect whether or not Microsoft is a monopoly (which it isn't). This is one example of many where Government involvement is NOT needed. We are taking care of Microsoft ourselves... why do you want to change that?
GREAT point! Microsoft brings in TONS of money every year. This is because people send them money. Microsoft can NOT take your money without you giving it to them.
You see, because of the free market, people all over this country have switched to Linux. Nobody forced them to do so... they do so because Linux is better for what they want to use their computer(s) for. Unfortunately, for the average (i.e. dumb) user, Windows is still easier to use and more convenient than Linux. We are working to change this, but at the current time, the average person that uses Windows will tell you that, yes, it sucks (i.e. unstable, slow, etc), BUT these they are willing to live with these problems for the ease of use.
Yes, Microsoft is a giant. Yes, they try to make money. Yes, they try to gain market share. But THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO DO in a free market! If businesses didn't try to make money, we would still be riding trains everywhere and building our own homemade computers.
Microsoft WILL fall by the way any company in a free market falls... by a better product taking away their market share! You can't expect this to happen overnight, as Microsoft has a HUGE userbase. And, in my opinion, they are still the best product for some people.
So, how can you, after seeing how the free market has allowed Linux to come in and cause serious damage to Microsoft's server market share, go crying to the government to interfere with capitalism at work and manually break up Microsoft?? The truth is that Microsoft is the BETTER product for many people to this day... and that probably pisses you off, and you don't want to accept it.
I hate Microsoft. I want to see them fall as much as you do. However, when they fall, I want them to KNOW that it was Linux that took them down... that it was a better product developed through the use of open source, that took down the giant! If the goverment goes in and breaks them up before we win, then they will just blame everything on the goverment instead of Linux. In 100 years, it will be the government that stopped Microsoft, not Linux.
We are making such good progress, why would you guys want the government to stop the war when we are on our way to victory?
I have never been FORCED to give Microsoft any money. In fact, the only person that has EVER forced me to give them money is the government via taxes (one of these days, I'm sure I will be robbed, but not yet). In fact, I don't think ANYBODY has been forced to give Microsoft their money... yet Microsoft takes in tons of it. This must mean that there are still tons of people that CHOOSE to give them money for one reason or another. We need to find these reasons and stop them ourselves.
The government is NOT the answer!
Some of you have the illusion that you (or anybody else) were forced to give your money to Microsoft. If you think so, post a reply and tell me how it happened, and we'll see if we can see how you were forced.
First of all, with that TV, you are really wasting
its capabilities if you don't use a Progressive-Scan DVD player with it, as it can take the signal. Also, be sure you are using S-Video at the least, and preferably the Component video for the connection from the TV to the DVD player.
Also, note that if you are (or decide to) use the
Component video (highest quality) connections from your DVD player to your TV, no receiver in that price range will be able to switch it. This means that you will have to use the S-Video input on the TV for everything *but* DVD, and then use one of th Component Video inputs for the DVD player (and the other Component Video input should be saved for an HDTV tuner).
That being said, I'm not sure if you want to spend $1500 on just the Receiver, or on the receiver and speakers. When I bought my first system, I had the same price limit, but I ended up spending about $2000 instead. I bought some great speakers from Definitive Technology (www.definitivetech.com) - I got the Pro200s for the front, Pro100s for the rear, ProCenter200, and the 15TL+ (15", 325Watt/RMS Sub). I got all of that for about $1500. Then, I bought a Yamaha receiver for about $500.
I think that Yamaha provides the best sound for the money in the $700 range (for a receiver).
However, if you want to get in the $1000+ range,
I like my Harman Kardon (which eventually replaced my Yamaha).
I don't know why people want an actual Dvorak
keyboard... just change in in your OS... it can
be done in any OS.
I switched to Dvorak after having many problems with my hands. Now my typing speed has increased from ~75wpm to 105wpm and my hands feel better than ever. As I'm a vi junkie, I also swapped the caps-lock and the ESC keys, as I never use caps-lock. This has caused me problems when using other machines besides mine (especially when I am telneting and using vi on those machines) more than Dvorak has (especially since you can't possibly make this change on Windows). I did also get myself a good chair (The Aeron by Herman Miller) and the MS natural keyboard and a Logitech trackball. I don't have any problems at all now.
I was happy with the article in general... especially the detailed log of how the hacker broke in. It is true that CGI scripts can potentially be security holes in an otherwise very secure system. My only problem with the article, however, is the treatment of the Red Hat official updates. You mention that there is no central place to find "linux" updates. Well, there is. Red Hat provides a central source for all of their official updates. This is the same thing as Microsoft providing its Service Packs. Red Hat guarantees that these security updates are okay to apply to your system... and, in fact, they don't release them unless you *should* install them on your system. You mention the program "AutoRPM" (I'm the author of this program). The best way to use this program is to have it regularly (i.e. every night) check the official set of updates from Red Hat and apply them if new ones come out. What you do, however, is configure AutoRPM to check the PGP signature of the updates before it applies them. When Red Hat releases security updates, the patches are signed with their private PGP key. If you configure AutoRPM properly, it will use Red Hat's public key to check this signature. In other words, with only a few changes to the default config file, you could have setup AutoRPM to automatically install *official* and *verified* security updates from Red Hat. The only reason this isn't the default configuration is that PGP doesn't come with Red Hat (due to US export restrictions on cryptography). If you would have spent the 5 minutes to properly install and configure AutoRPM, the Red Hat Linux machine would *not* have been hacked (at least not in the way it was) because the cron security exploit would have been automatically patched by AutoRPM. - Kirk Bauer