Frankly, in this day and age, anyone who pays for cable should be ashamed of themselves--they need to get out and experience the world not in front of a TV! And I say this as someone who does watch a great deal of TV, but still could never justify the ridiculous cost of cable television (in the US, at least). I don't need to repeat people's arguments here about how great internet TV is--it's true, and certainly the way of the future. Miro, Hulu, Netflix, etc. replace any need I would ever have for cable. I just hate all the international restrictions that prevent me from watching the shows I want as I travel around the world, forcing me to resort to bittorrent and other questionably-legal means.
I certainly hope this forces cable companies to change, lower their prices and innovate.
Cable (both TV and internet) is so much less expensive here in the UK, where there is actual competition amongst cable operators! This is what we are so lacking here in the US, champion of the so-called "free market." I wouldn't mind paying for quality content, as long as I can access it from anywhere and it's not encumbered with DRM. I want to cut out the cable companies making money and pay directly to the television and film creators. I also don't want to pay the ridiculous fees charged by e.g. iTunes. $1 for a single episode is still too expensive. I'd agree to a 1-year "subscription" for a particular show, if it was closer to 50p/episode.
I am usually a supporter of the Times, but this time they are really being irresponsible. It's difficult enough to educate the public as to the true meaning of "open source" and "Free software", let alone when we're hampered by these dumbed-down, technically ignorant reports. This article only spreads confusion, and certainly doesn't highlight the great work being done by the many great, true open source game developers in the community.
At least, music as an art form. Everything now is electronic, and don't even start to argue that all this new-age/electronic/computer-generated bullshit is art-music. It's great that you like it, and I don't want to put it down or stop anyone from enjoying it, but it's simply a completely different thing than traditional art-music, which is what most people think of as classical, jazz, and other ethnic musics.
The only hope for the future is that people will continue to perform live, unplugged concerts.
What I'd like to see is a real guitar/MIDI interface for these types of games, so that people who actually do know how to play can do so, have it scored by the game, and even play with their friends who aren't musicians.
(waits patiently for some slashdotter to show me that this already exists...)
I don't mean to offend those who are genuinely interested in this game, but is this story really worthy of being on the front page? Sorry for trolling, but I just don't understand it. Slow news day perhaps.
Ah, I wasn't considering one-off orders, I was thinking utilities and things of that nature.
Storing encryption keys is actually quite simple, I don't understand why companies don't make this option available. If users can't figure it out, they don't have to use it--they can continue to download their statements manually.
What companies are actually e-mailing bills to you? Are they being encrypted? This is exactly what I want, but I have yet to find a company that will do this.
Companies need to start making use of the various secure means of delivering bills. The easiest way, would be to allow me to send them my GPG key (via their SSL website or whatever) and then encrypt and email the bloody thing to me. It's so simple! I get sick and tired of companies sending me an email saying "you have a new bill, come see". Just send it to me in the first place! Encryption is not that difficult. I want to be able to archive them on my own. I don't want to deal with paper, for both the inconvenience and environmental impact. I just want to file them away in a far corner of my hard drive, knowing I will probably never need to look at them again. Why is this so difficult for companies to implement?
As you can see from the comments here, there are an *abundance* of excellent free, open source games available for Linux. Please do not ship these machines with Windows XP! Instead, you could ship them with Ubuntu and a load of games and educational software pre-installed. Getting new users, and especially kids, hooked on MS from the start is the worst thing you could do!
"The XPCom component contained within the contents of this extension is licensed by Skyhook Wireless, Inc. ("Skyhook") and are subject to the Skyhook license and terms of use (the "Skyhook License"); you may not use this component except in compliance with the Skyhook License.
You may obtain a copy of the Skyhook License at [need URL]"
I didn't look long, but I could not find any "Skyhook License" on Skyhook's website (which is I guess why they chose not to fill in the URL!). I certainly would not use a product for which the license was in question like this, especially considering the proprietary, binary-only DLLs they provide. Not that I would be able to try it out, since it only includes 32-bit Windows and Mac libraries, no Linux at all.
Can you install your own build of Android, for example? Get rid of all the T-Mobile crap it probably comes with, and choose what you want to install? Or do they prevent you from reflashing somehow?
I realise that eventually people will get around any such limitation and figure out how to reflash the phone, but it really bothers me because we shouldn't have to as they are touting this as an "open platform." It's already inexcusable that the sim card is locked in this thing. So is it really open, or is it just all hype?
This is a very valid point, and should be modded up. Every software author and project is entitled to the same rights Mozilla is asking for. A better solution needs to be created, such as a single catch-all "no warranty" EULA one must agree to when installing a distribution for the first time, that applies to all packages within that distribution's repository.
Perhaps something along the line of a "General Public EULA" that software authors could choose to adopt. I'm not entirely sure how this differs from the license in general, however.
What is the difference between this new unbranded "abrowser" package and Iceweasel, other than having a different name? I thought Iceweasel was meant to be exactly what abrowser claims...
It's sad that Gary Sinnott decided to take down the site. He should keep it up, and have all the mail forwarded to Wikileaks just in case something useful comes through again. There are plenty of members of the community who would monitor the email if he doesn't want to deal with it himself!
I'd love to see Air Force One shot down as a result of such a pathetic security breach. Even if the president wasn't on it, it would be such a demoralising blow, such an embarrassment to the United States, it would be glorious.
It's only anti-competitive based on the assumption that the system should allow for installation of third-party applications in the first place. Now, I would certainly demand this for any system I chose to run, but I don't see how it could be a legal requirement. There are countless closed systems like this (think embedded systems: routers, calculators, TV's, etc.). They don't get in trouble for not allowing 3rd party applications to be run, so why should an OS vendor? Of course competition and innovation are good, I just don't think it should be expected from a proprietary software company.
I do agree that Apple is not "crippling" anything by doing this. They ARE, however using their proprietary knowledge of their own operating system to gain a technical advantage, which they are perfectly entitled to do. This is why open-source operating systems are always preferred.
IAMAL, so I don't know whether a class action suit would have any legal basis, but theoretically I certainly see no reason why a proprietary software vendor should be in any way prohibited from crippling other software, or even some draconian measure such as capping software without a special Apple key to 25% CPU usage. This is what you MUST accept when using proprietary software. You have no rights. Why is this difficult to understand? Apple is doing basically the same thing with the iPhone--do you think that a class action suit is going force them to remove the restriction on installing 3rd party applications? I sure don't.
They are thinking that they are developing a proprietary operating system and they can do WHATEVER THEY WANT. Do not complain about this. It is Apple's right to do this. That's what you get when you make a deal with the devil... Both Microsoft and Apple have the right to cripple other people's software or make their proprietary operating systems run in any way they choose. Just accept it. If you don't like it, I've heard a rumour that there are a few alternatives out there...
I ran into this problem a month or more ago, and figured it out. On Ubuntu, my issue was not the Firefox/Linux user agent, but rather the Vendor string that Ubuntu adds. I changed the following three Firefox config options to "" and the Windows Live Hotmail interface loads fine.
The resulting user agent that WORKS with Hotmail is:
"Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-GB; rv:1.8.1.12) Gecko/20080207 Firefox/2.0.0.12"
So it appears that Microsoft is not trying to exclude other browsers, but rather other OPERATING SYSTEMS. This, I believe, is even worse, and much more nefarious. If it is intentional, I think a fair case can be made that this is an illegal, monopolistic, anti-competitive practice. It's possible, however, that their user-agent detection simply cannot handle the vendor strings.
This article barely even talks about software real musicians would actually use, namely scoring software. I would very much like to have the likes of Sibelius or Finale, as some have already mentioned in this thread. Rosegarden isn't there yet. Lilypond doesn't apply, since -typesetting- is unrelated to music and very different than actually creating music.
Regardless, why is there all this emphasis on so-called "pro-audio" software and all this other nonsense? What is the point? I don't understand what it's even used for. Simply editing a recording is a pretty simple operation. I don't think a real musician has any need for all these other programs. They might be useful if you want to work for Brittany Spears, but such a person could hardly call him or herself a "musician".
It doesn't matter what country a person lives in, they have every right to a job that an American does. I get SO sick of whining Americans! Especially when the jobs we're talking about aren't exactly unskilled labour--it's well-off people that are losing these jobs, not poor people barely able to make ends meet.
What we should be concerned about is that foreign workers are not paid any less than American workers. This is what is most troubling. When workers are paid the same for the same work as they should be, then companies will employ those best equipped for the job, regardless of where they live.
Also include an option to copy the sender on the email. One thing I'm frustrated with when I use contact forms, is that, unless I copy and paste my message somewhere, I have no record of what I sent or when I sent it. If you include an option to automatically send me a copy of the message I sent, I can move it to my regular Sent folder and all will be well in the world.
Big-brother fascism perhaps, but not socialism. Socialism is an economic policy, and certainly cannot work when one's government violates one's civil liberties in this way. I really hate it when people confuse the two because of certain tyrannical governments that call themselves communists or socialists.
I wish they would just outlaw all books. And reading for that matter. Really, I mean, it's just a tool the terrorists use to destroy our freedom. It's not like I NEED to read anything, I can get any book I need on tape, or better yet, made into a TV movie. I'd much rather watch it on TV anyway. People who read are usually just nerds that think they know more than everybody else. I'm sick of all you smarty-pants anyway. Let's ban reeding! Save Freedom! Save Democracy!
Slashdot Mirror
Frankly, in this day and age, anyone who pays for cable should be ashamed of themselves--they need to get out and experience the world not in front of a TV! And I say this as someone who does watch a great deal of TV, but still could never justify the ridiculous cost of cable television (in the US, at least). I don't need to repeat people's arguments here about how great internet TV is--it's true, and certainly the way of the future. Miro, Hulu, Netflix, etc. replace any need I would ever have for cable. I just hate all the international restrictions that prevent me from watching the shows I want as I travel around the world, forcing me to resort to bittorrent and other questionably-legal means.
I certainly hope this forces cable companies to change, lower their prices and innovate.
Cable (both TV and internet) is so much less expensive here in the UK, where there is actual competition amongst cable operators! This is what we are so lacking here in the US, champion of the so-called "free market." I wouldn't mind paying for quality content, as long as I can access it from anywhere and it's not encumbered with DRM. I want to cut out the cable companies making money and pay directly to the television and film creators. I also don't want to pay the ridiculous fees charged by e.g. iTunes. $1 for a single episode is still too expensive. I'd agree to a 1-year "subscription" for a particular show, if it was closer to 50p/episode.
I am usually a supporter of the Times, but this time they are really being irresponsible. It's difficult enough to educate the public as to the true meaning of "open source" and "Free software", let alone when we're hampered by these dumbed-down, technically ignorant reports. This article only spreads confusion, and certainly doesn't highlight the great work being done by the many great, true open source game developers in the community.
Break up with your wife and leave your family behind. They deserve better than a disgusting murderer for a husband and father. Set them free...
At least, music as an art form. Everything now is electronic, and don't even start to argue that all this new-age/electronic/computer-generated bullshit is art-music. It's great that you like it, and I don't want to put it down or stop anyone from enjoying it, but it's simply a completely different thing than traditional art-music, which is what most people think of as classical, jazz, and other ethnic musics.
The only hope for the future is that people will continue to perform live, unplugged concerts.
What I'd like to see is a real guitar/MIDI interface for these types of games, so that people who actually do know how to play can do so, have it scored by the game, and even play with their friends who aren't musicians.
(waits patiently for some slashdotter to show me that this already exists...)
I don't mean to offend those who are genuinely interested in this game, but is this story really worthy of being on the front page? Sorry for trolling, but I just don't understand it. Slow news day perhaps.
Ah, I wasn't considering one-off orders, I was thinking utilities and things of that nature.
Storing encryption keys is actually quite simple, I don't understand why companies don't make this option available. If users can't figure it out, they don't have to use it--they can continue to download their statements manually.
What companies are actually e-mailing bills to you? Are they being encrypted? This is exactly what I want, but I have yet to find a company that will do this.
Companies need to start making use of the various secure means of delivering bills. The easiest way, would be to allow me to send them my GPG key (via their SSL website or whatever) and then encrypt and email the bloody thing to me. It's so simple! I get sick and tired of companies sending me an email saying "you have a new bill, come see". Just send it to me in the first place! Encryption is not that difficult. I want to be able to archive them on my own. I don't want to deal with paper, for both the inconvenience and environmental impact. I just want to file them away in a far corner of my hard drive, knowing I will probably never need to look at them again. Why is this so difficult for companies to implement?
As you can see from the comments here, there are an *abundance* of excellent free, open source games available for Linux. Please do not ship these machines with Windows XP! Instead, you could ship them with Ubuntu and a load of games and educational software pre-installed. Getting new users, and especially kids, hooked on MS from the start is the worst thing you could do!
From the included LICENSE.TXT:
"The XPCom component contained within the contents of this extension is licensed by
Skyhook Wireless, Inc. ("Skyhook") and are subject to the Skyhook license and
terms of use (the "Skyhook License"); you may not use this component except
in compliance with the Skyhook License.
You may obtain a copy of the Skyhook License at [need URL]"
I didn't look long, but I could not find any "Skyhook License" on Skyhook's website (which is I guess why they chose not to fill in the URL!). I certainly would not use a product for which the license was in question like this, especially considering the proprietary, binary-only DLLs they provide. Not that I would be able to try it out, since it only includes 32-bit Windows and Mac libraries, no Linux at all.
Buyer beware, as they say...
Can you install your own build of Android, for example? Get rid of all the T-Mobile crap it probably comes with, and choose what you want to install? Or do they prevent you from reflashing somehow?
I realise that eventually people will get around any such limitation and figure out how to reflash the phone, but it really bothers me because we shouldn't have to as they are touting this as an "open platform." It's already inexcusable that the sim card is locked in this thing. So is it really open, or is it just all hype?
This is a very valid point, and should be modded up. Every software author and project is entitled to the same rights Mozilla is asking for. A better solution needs to be created, such as a single catch-all "no warranty" EULA one must agree to when installing a distribution for the first time, that applies to all packages within that distribution's repository.
Perhaps something along the line of a "General Public EULA" that software authors could choose to adopt. I'm not entirely sure how this differs from the license in general, however.
Did you bother reading the post? That's exactly what both abrowser and Iceweasel are.
What is the difference between this new unbranded "abrowser" package and Iceweasel, other than having a different name? I thought Iceweasel was meant to be exactly what abrowser claims...
It's sad that Gary Sinnott decided to take down the site. He should keep it up, and have all the mail forwarded to Wikileaks just in case something useful comes through again. There are plenty of members of the community who would monitor the email if he doesn't want to deal with it himself!
I'd love to see Air Force One shot down as a result of such a pathetic security breach. Even if the president wasn't on it, it would be such a demoralising blow, such an embarrassment to the United States, it would be glorious.
It's only anti-competitive based on the assumption that the system should allow for installation of third-party applications in the first place. Now, I would certainly demand this for any system I chose to run, but I don't see how it could be a legal requirement. There are countless closed systems like this (think embedded systems: routers, calculators, TV's, etc.). They don't get in trouble for not allowing 3rd party applications to be run, so why should an OS vendor? Of course competition and innovation are good, I just don't think it should be expected from a proprietary software company.
I do agree that Apple is not "crippling" anything by doing this. They ARE, however using their proprietary knowledge of their own operating system to gain a technical advantage, which they are perfectly entitled to do. This is why open-source operating systems are always preferred.
IAMAL, so I don't know whether a class action suit would have any legal basis, but theoretically I certainly see no reason why a proprietary software vendor should be in any way prohibited from crippling other software, or even some draconian measure such as capping software without a special Apple key to 25% CPU usage. This is what you MUST accept when using proprietary software. You have no rights. Why is this difficult to understand? Apple is doing basically the same thing with the iPhone--do you think that a class action suit is going force them to remove the restriction on installing 3rd party applications? I sure don't.
They are thinking that they are developing a proprietary operating system and they can do WHATEVER THEY WANT. Do not complain about this. It is Apple's right to do this. That's what you get when you make a deal with the devil... Both Microsoft and Apple have the right to cripple other people's software or make their proprietary operating systems run in any way they choose. Just accept it. If you don't like it, I've heard a rumour that there are a few alternatives out there...
I ran into this problem a month or more ago, and figured it out. On Ubuntu, my issue was not the Firefox/Linux user agent, but rather the Vendor string that Ubuntu adds. I changed the following three Firefox config options to "" and the Windows Live Hotmail interface loads fine.
general.useragent.vendor (was "Ubuntu")
general.useragent.vendorComment (was "Gutsy")
general.useragent.vendorSub (was "7.10")
The resulting user agent that WORKS with Hotmail is:
"Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-GB; rv:1.8.1.12) Gecko/20080207 Firefox/2.0.0.12"
So it appears that Microsoft is not trying to exclude other browsers, but rather other OPERATING SYSTEMS. This, I believe, is even worse, and much more nefarious. If it is intentional, I think a fair case can be made that this is an illegal, monopolistic, anti-competitive practice. It's possible, however, that their user-agent detection simply cannot handle the vendor strings.
This article barely even talks about software real musicians would actually use, namely scoring software. I would very much like to have the likes of Sibelius or Finale, as some have already mentioned in this thread. Rosegarden isn't there yet. Lilypond doesn't apply, since -typesetting- is unrelated to music and very different than actually creating music.
Regardless, why is there all this emphasis on so-called "pro-audio" software and all this other nonsense? What is the point? I don't understand what it's even used for. Simply editing a recording is a pretty simple operation. I don't think a real musician has any need for all these other programs. They might be useful if you want to work for Brittany Spears, but such a person could hardly call him or herself a "musician".
It doesn't matter what country a person lives in, they have every right to a job that an American does. I get SO sick of whining Americans! Especially when the jobs we're talking about aren't exactly unskilled labour--it's well-off people that are losing these jobs, not poor people barely able to make ends meet.
What we should be concerned about is that foreign workers are not paid any less than American workers. This is what is most troubling. When workers are paid the same for the same work as they should be, then companies will employ those best equipped for the job, regardless of where they live.
Also include an option to copy the sender on the email. One thing I'm frustrated with when I use contact forms, is that, unless I copy and paste my message somewhere, I have no record of what I sent or when I sent it. If you include an option to automatically send me a copy of the message I sent, I can move it to my regular Sent folder and all will be well in the world.
Big-brother fascism perhaps, but not socialism. Socialism is an economic policy, and certainly cannot work when one's government violates one's civil liberties in this way. I really hate it when people confuse the two because of certain tyrannical governments that call themselves communists or socialists.
I wish they would just outlaw all books. And reading for that matter. Really, I mean, it's just a tool the terrorists use to destroy our freedom. It's not like I NEED to read anything, I can get any book I need on tape, or better yet, made into a TV movie. I'd much rather watch it on TV anyway. People who read are usually just nerds that think they know more than everybody else. I'm sick of all you smarty-pants anyway. Let's ban reeding! Save Freedom! Save Democracy!