The guy is a terminal user, almost a poster boy fit for an M$ advert:
... my full days schedule on average: I wake up, take a shower and then groom myself. I then head downstairs and turn my television on which just so happens to have a Windows Media Center PC hooked up to it. I then head over to the kitchen which happens to have a Windows powered laptop which I use to somberly browse the net while I eat Captain Crunch out of the box and throw milk down my throat. I run off and get dressed but not before I synch my Windows CE powered pocket PC and then I drive off to school. On my way I forget I have no money on me and so I must stop by the bank to withdraw some and guess what? The ATM machine happens to run embedded Windows! I could go on and on but I think that I would start to freak some of you out with my weird pre-dinner rituals. Anyways, my point was merely to show that many of us use Windows whether or not we even know it.
Nuts. What freaks me out is the penetration M$ has into his house. He names what, 4 licenses he's paid for before he gets to the bank, which has unfortunately wasted more of his money on his behalf. He forgot to mention his M$ "powered" phone, his BMW and a half dozen other overpriced and underperforming junk.
The article takes issue with the FCC calling anything over 200 Kbps broadband.
That's because the FCC once called broadband something that would allow customers to stream high quality video both ways. That takes an order of magnitude more than that.
Why is it the role of the federal government to ensure cheap broadband by 2007?
It's not, but their policies mandating monopoly telco services are why things are so fucked up.
I'm much more comfortable with an array of choice from private sources.
Gee, that's the point of the article, if you bothered to read it. They are complaining about the federal government granting monopoly service to the surviving incumbents - giving a small number of companies ownership of the public networks you paid for instead of granting equal access to all comers.
That's much less likely to lead to bad things like censorship and limits on free expression.
Exactly. By limiting the number of providers, the Federal government is in a position to sit down on the internet the way they did broadcast TV. Welcome to the future, it looks exactly like corporate controlled broadcasts of yesterday.
I'd be happy if government, federal, state and local got out of the way of people who want to string wires between houses or offer service over the airwaves. Fat chance. GWB is so stupid he's worried about.xxx, without realizing that's the best way to censor porn and is a puppet of your new fascist overlords. The Democrats are fucking communists who want to own the network directly like China. There is a good example of how sucky two bad choices can be.
What she says is that you can't know something else is cheaper if you can't break down where all your money goes. That's nonsense favorable to M$'s complicated licensing and the innumerable "support" demands of software that sucks. It should be obvious that software that has none of these problems is cheaper to own.
Seems to me that Microsoft would prefer that you refresh your X-Box 360 each year with a new $200 purchase to get the latest technology.
With 5 versions planned, all with the same name but different, it sounds exactly like the world of "standard" PCs and file formats. Look to planned obsolescence of your games, etc, etc. As DRM on the xbox is like DRM in Windoze times ten, so the non uniformity of xbox will mirror their PCs. Only M$ can cluster fuck what's supposed to be commodity like that. Yeh, haw, fizzz.
Just stick to the standards, then all browsers will be able to access it.
Yes, standards like the ones Slashcode uses. I can access Slashdot from IE, Konq, Mozilla and Dillo. No web bugs here. Nor are there many to be found at most sites worth reading.
The only problems I ever have are from sites offering non free crap. They are almost never worth dealing with anyway. Opps, I just let you know what I think of IE only sites.
The subjugation of public institutions by private interests is called fascism. When your city government clicks, "I agree" to the average M$ EULA, you are very screwed. Say no to backdoored public computing.
The older, hard drive based players do and are very nice. The newer 5 gig ones do not. Also, the littler players with the thumb joystick have broken usbfs that does not work under linux, so you will be stuck with DRM encumbered and virus prone Winblows for your music that way. I was willing to pay the extra money for the device but not to put up with broken USB and brought it back. So, if you want something iRiver that works with free music you are still stuck paying a premium for an expensive device which may not be available.
Thanks. I've been working on scripts to do the opposite, ogg2mp3, so I can use a cheap music player. My script used sox to make a wav then toolame to encode to mp3 but did nothing with tags or the name.
It would be better if device vendors got with the program and started making cheap and tiny ogg players. The sound quality going between the two compressed formats is "good enough" but it would be easier to not have to fool with mp3 at all.
Open Source Textbooks are already here.
on
Textbooks With EULAs
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
It's too bad OSS textbooks would not catch on here in the states.... For some topics you'd still need outside texts but basic biology, chemistry and physics there's no reason those couldn't be standardized. PV=NRT hasn't changed in years.
You must never have seen Wikipedia. Course material can easily be made from it's contents and it's already better than most texts.
Profs and schools get major payola from the textbook publishers. That's why the prices go up and up and you never schools publish their own texts, which would save students a fortune.
No they don't and that's not the reason. Writing a textbook is a work of love with few rewards for a professor. Textbook publishers have their pick of material and don't need to reward anyone. The mechanics of dead tree publishing don't work out for small runs, so you won't see any but the largest and most well known universities printing books. Electronic publishing is another mater and I expect that to become huge.
EBooks are a failure but real texts are doomed.
on
Textbooks With EULAs
·
· Score: 0
So why are companies still trying to push what has been proven time and time again to be a product that nobody wants? It ain't gonna work.
The end of textbooks is at hand but those who make them still hope to push their obsolete model into the new world. The result is something that is the pain in the ass you noticed. Ebooks combine all the worst features of paper and electronic publishing. The people who actually create knowledge, professors themselves, are already putting their work on line so you don't have to worry about Ebooks catching on, ever. Professor never made money on the textbook boon-dogle anyway and have much to gain from things like Wiki.
My anatomy class this summer taught me how useless text books are. In my bag, I carried a laptop and sometimes a textbook. The laptop helped out because I could Wiki. One day, I realized that the text book was heavier than the laptop and contained less information. Then I realized that the same could be true for any class. The textbook presented a limited introductory set of information to the subject, which was further limited by the professor to fit time constraints. Had he been with it, he could have his notes taken from and point to Wiki instead of the text and saved his class a bunch of money.
To be fair, the publisher was making efforts to be current. They sent the professor electronic images of illustrations and encouraged a whole host of proprietary, though not DRM'd junk. He published them all as power point presentations in an awkward, enrolled student only "blackboard" space. The format worked out. Students printed the lectures and took notes on them. If the goofey new Power Point forbids printing and acts like dissapearing ink, it won't work at all. Tests, which stated "Perception is licensed to LSU", were a pain and a step backward from paper.
Their efforts won't work. Regular electronic publishing is easier for everyone and Keduca works better than the silly testing system my University bought into.
... the CPCC held all levy proceeds in trust and will be returning them to the manufacturers.
CPCC should be returning the money and passing the buck onto Apple is their second screw. They punished Apple by extorting the money in the first place. Returning the money will cost Apple another pretty penny that the CPCC should pay. Apple will have to pay the administrative costs of the refund and bear ill will generated by CPCC record keeping mistakes.
The actual plan is much like the Brotherhood of 1984. Create fake opposition propaganda and encourage or entrap your naive enemy. The internet is perfect for this and a much better trap than the one Winston fell for. See for yourself:
In a posting not long after the London attacks, a member of one of the al Qaeda-linked online forums asked how to take action himself. A cell of two or three people is better, replied another member in an exchange translated by the SITE Institute. Even better than that is a "virtual cell, an agreement between a group of brothers over the Internet." It is "safe," extolled the anonymous poster, and "nobody will know the identity of each other in the beginning." Once "harmony and mutual trust" are established, training conducted and videos watched, then "you can meet in reality and execute some operation in the field."
OK, that's creepy, but that's the point of the article. The action implied is killing innocent people. So this is what happens to those who start conversing and working on that action:
... Royal Canadian Mounted Police officers burst into the Ottawa home of Mohammed Momin Khawaja, a 24-year-old computer programmer, on March 29, 2004, arresting him for alleged complicity... Khawaja, a contractor with Canada's Foreign Ministry, met his alleged British counterparts online and came to the attention of authorities only when he traveled to Britain and walked into a surveillance operation... met with his online acquaintances in an Internet cafe in London, where he showed them images of explosive devices found on the Web and told them how to detonate bombs using cell phones. The first person jailed under a strict new Canadian anti-terrorism law passed after Sept. 11, Khawaja is not scheduled to have a preliminary hearing on his case until January.
Hmmm, I hope there's more than that to go on. It's not hard to make a cell phone blow up a package and (hopefully) not a crime to tell others how. Most cell phones have a vibrator, which can be tapped to trigger a relay or igniter. Anyone who knows how to make explosives go off is sure to also know how to make a cell phone do the work. I hope they have evidence the group was going to actually put bombs in public places. If not, what they are going to jail for is Thought Crime.
Thought Crime is a wonderfully flexible way to put people in jail. I like how the author uses a computer programmer and roll playing game communities for examples.
... the only thing that has changed between now and then is now we have more insecure WIFI networks...
What, exactly, does wifi change? The average big dumb company has all of their desktops running Outlook, IE and other trash. So every one of their computers is open to exploit from everywhere in the world. So what's a big dumb company to worry about? Their desktops having keyloggers and back orifice put on by any of the 300,000,000 Winblows computers in the world, or someone sitting in their parking lot? Why would anyone go to the trouble of parking outside your building when they can exploit you from afar?
I saw it happen to my computer at the last big dumb company I worked for. I clicked on an email and it exploded porn browsers and started churning the hard drive. I hit the power button. When I reported the incident to the email administrator, they were clueless and thought I was worried about being nailed for porn. They did not believe me either and insisted on clicking the damn thing by pc anywhere. They left without waiting for the results to show, so the stupid thing executed to completion. When I asked them if they wanted to reinstall my machine, they blew it off as "normal advertising". With attitudes like that, the company network was a sieve.
Now these morons at the New York Times would scare people away from wireless networks. Perfect. It's the kind of logic that you see where cell phones with cameras are forbidden but normal cameras and photo copiers are not. Don't you know someone will sell you a solution?
There's another myth out there that's not true. It goes something like, writing software is hard, if you don't give me your money you can't do what you want because no one will write high quality software to do it. The people who spout that line are busy filing absurd business method patents because there are actually lots of people happy to get things done without their help. As for the quality of what the liars put out we have stories like melted's:
Let's see, you're a development manager and you have a crazy schedule forced on you from above by some idiotic VP. Now this guy from product support comes along and tells you about this horrible flaw that will require you to shut down all development for two weeks, slip the schedule and have your best people fix it. Then you shut down testing for a month and have your best testers test it. Then there's a pain of pushing out a patch and notifying the customers and bad PR associated with that.
And so, closed source is a model that does not work and never did. I don't feel sorry for people who work for idiots and don't think others should do as they say to make their lives easier. The tragedy is that people work for idiots and then those idiots make life harder for the rest of us.
Sheetrock, a name that rings ugly bells, defends wiretaping of ISP equipment this way:
How many people have a service like that? It looks like they want to retain their wiretap capability for voice communication as we move into VoIP, not monitor everything you do.
He must have read the EFF site to say something so obviously inflametory and stupid.
The FCC's new proposal to expand CALEA to airline broadband illustrates the fallacy of law enforcement's rationale for its CALEA request. The DOJ takes the position that broadband has "substantially replaced" the local telephone exchange, but this claim is reduced to the point of absurdity aboard an airplane and opens the door for CALEA to cover just about anything.
Combine that with National Security Letters, NSL, and you have something everyone should be concerned with. Also from the EFF, one story down:
NSLs are secret subpoenas for communications logs, issued directly by the FBI without any judicial oversight. These secret subpoenas allow the FBI to demand that online service providers produce records of where their customers go on the Web, as well as what they read and with whom they exchange email. The FBI can even issue NSLs for information about people who haven't committed any crimes.
Your government is looking for dirt on innocent people. The Bush administration has used domestic spying to harass political opposition and we should imagine the same will be applied here. That's something no one should be able to do.
I RTFA and it does not even imply that MONAD will not be included in Windows Vista because of the virus threat.
The news.com article with the link, "virus target not in vista"? No implications there. We now return you to your daily dose of truth M$ style.
Hi everyone, Stephen Toulouse here.... Its hard to predict what type of malicious software criminals might develop to attack future versions of operating systems. But rest assured were on the case! The MSRC will be here to investigate and provide the guidance to help protect customers no matter what attacks may impact customers.
The rest of his blog goes on to brag about how Microsoft Users are perfectly safe. Just to prove the point, that buggy new shell won't be there.
In the last 12 minutes, 1/2 of the "unpatched" Windozed boxes were owned by crackers. Perfectly safe indeed.
If you burn something in air, if you get the air hot enough then you combine some of the nitrogen in the air with oxygen. I wonder what steps these folks have taken to prevent or minimize emission of nitrogen oxides.
Not much will be produced without a chimney. All that "water", aka superheated steam, will stay in the room and turn it into a sauna. There should be enough moisture in the air to cool the flame down in short order. Of course, you might prefer a chimney to sweat soaking furniture, but I digress.
How is this different than writing a ksh or bash script virus? Ksh and bash script viruses can be just as bad.
Two differences that spring to mind are:
There's no big dumb company spending billions of dollars to push bash on anyone as safe and secure. Nor will bash be installed as an adjunct to commercial software without the installer's knowledge.
Bash runs mostly on OS with real users and permmissions, which M$ just won't get. That means, contrary to your assertion, bash is not as bad.
Apparently Apple's DRM kernel extension only gets involved when Rosetta is executing code. In other words, if you're running native code, there's no checking.
That's really poor reasoning. First, "Native" code can require the Paladium code to work. Second, Apple using M$'s Paladium is a sign of the end times!
Really, aren't you just a little worried to see Apple sucking up to M$'s treacherous computing initiative? Dumbass lawmakers will give lip service to this as a "responsible attempt to control piracy" or some other BS and then make anything that does not use it against the law. You know, like no more free software unless it's crippled by some piece of shit from M$.
Now, I hate MSFT probably a bit more than most people here, but this patent actually a good idea.
Steve, we know you hate your job and wish you had gone into selling insurance but you have to get back to work now and quit astroturfing Slashdot. We pay lots of people in India a hell of a lot less money than we pay you to do this.
What Microsoft should do is open up their software, and invest their money in more programmers, but not to do coding, to act as support for the rest of us who do the coding.
Ah, so you support the "free as in slave labor" open-source model?
That is the current "What's mine is mine and what's yours is mine" M$ arrangement. With "Shared Source", they think they are open enough. As the likes of IBM, Correl, Netscape and other huge software houses have been unable to produce quality product or make money in the Winblows world, all you little guys can expect about the same from them.
The short answer to the question, "Could this ever happen?" is yes it can, but they won't and they will say they did anyway. It's all about selling the same old shit by saying whatever they think people want to hear. They have not changed in 20 years, despite people's happiest of fantasies.
Obviously the mobile internet service required for this particicular hotspot is expensive, and you'd be mad to want to offer it for open access at your own expense,
That's not obvious. With all the miles of dark fiber in this country and "all you can eat" cell phone plans, you would hope that per byte charges would be a thing of the past. Indeed, only one of Verizon's plans are pay as you go, and Verizon sucks life. So, with a flat fee, what's the point of not letting other people use your bandwith? So you can have your $1,000 goodies to yourself? Those goodies are only valuable when they are attached to a network and the network is only valuable because other people are there.
As more devices we carry around become wifi equipped imagine if your iPod, phone, psp and camera are all enabled & communicating with each other, having them all on a common network and working to each of their strengths
I don't own any devices that don't talk to my laptop so wifi won't offer me anything new. USB and pcmcia card readers work just fine and take much less power than wifi. Still, the are all relatively useless without network access. What's the point of pictures that I can't share with my family? Even the largest music collections go stale. My laptop runs free software because that's the easiest way for me to share things with myself and my friends.
Slashdot Mirror
Nuts. What freaks me out is the penetration M$ has into his house. He names what, 4 licenses he's paid for before he gets to the bank, which has unfortunately wasted more of his money on his behalf. He forgot to mention his M$ "powered" phone, his BMW and a half dozen other overpriced and underperforming junk.
That's because the FCC once called broadband something that would allow customers to stream high quality video both ways. That takes an order of magnitude more than that.
It's not, but their policies mandating monopoly telco services are why things are so fucked up.
I'm much more comfortable with an array of choice from private sources.
Gee, that's the point of the article, if you bothered to read it. They are complaining about the federal government granting monopoly service to the surviving incumbents - giving a small number of companies ownership of the public networks you paid for instead of granting equal access to all comers.
That's much less likely to lead to bad things like censorship and limits on free expression.
Exactly. By limiting the number of providers, the Federal government is in a position to sit down on the internet the way they did broadcast TV. Welcome to the future, it looks exactly like corporate controlled broadcasts of yesterday.
I'd be happy if government, federal, state and local got out of the way of people who want to string wires between houses or offer service over the airwaves. Fat chance. GWB is so stupid he's worried about .xxx, without realizing that's the best way to censor porn and is a puppet of your new fascist overlords. The Democrats are fucking communists who want to own the network directly like China. There is a good example of how sucky two bad choices can be.
Yes, that's what she says. It's so typical of Microsoft:
If anyone treats you that way, you can be suer of only one thing: they are ripping you off.
With 5 versions planned, all with the same name but different, it sounds exactly like the world of "standard" PCs and file formats. Look to planned obsolescence of your games, etc, etc. As DRM on the xbox is like DRM in Windoze times ten, so the non uniformity of xbox will mirror their PCs. Only M$ can cluster fuck what's supposed to be commodity like that. Yeh, haw, fizzz.
Who buys those ugly things?
w3c.
Yes, standards like the ones Slashcode uses. I can access Slashdot from IE, Konq, Mozilla and Dillo. No web bugs here. Nor are there many to be found at most sites worth reading.
The only problems I ever have are from sites offering non free crap. They are almost never worth dealing with anyway. Opps, I just let you know what I think of IE only sites.
Yes, we should imagine that much of the "donation" will be software and hardware valued at retail. That's typical of Microsoft.
What's more disturbing is having police departments business run by Microsoft. One of the first things Bill G did was to make sure the class scheduling program he sold his high school put him with all the "pretty girls". The rest of his career and Microsoft practices have been a series of broken trust, from breaking other people's programs to spying on every thing you do. Do we really want that kind of equipment in police stations? At any price?
The subjugation of public institutions by private interests is called fascism. When your city government clicks, "I agree" to the average M$ EULA, you are very screwed. Say no to backdoored public computing.
iRiver mp3 players play ogg files, nuff said.
The older, hard drive based players do and are very nice. The newer 5 gig ones do not. Also, the littler players with the thumb joystick have broken usbfs that does not work under linux, so you will be stuck with DRM encumbered and virus prone Winblows for your music that way. I was willing to pay the extra money for the device but not to put up with broken USB and brought it back. So, if you want something iRiver that works with free music you are still stuck paying a premium for an expensive device which may not be available.
It would be better if device vendors got with the program and started making cheap and tiny ogg players. The sound quality going between the two compressed formats is "good enough" but it would be easier to not have to fool with mp3 at all.
You must never have seen Wikipedia. Course material can easily be made from it's contents and it's already better than most texts.
Profs and schools get major payola from the textbook publishers. That's why the prices go up and up and you never schools publish their own texts, which would save students a fortune.
No they don't and that's not the reason. Writing a textbook is a work of love with few rewards for a professor. Textbook publishers have their pick of material and don't need to reward anyone. The mechanics of dead tree publishing don't work out for small runs, so you won't see any but the largest and most well known universities printing books. Electronic publishing is another mater and I expect that to become huge.
The end of textbooks is at hand but those who make them still hope to push their obsolete model into the new world. The result is something that is the pain in the ass you noticed. Ebooks combine all the worst features of paper and electronic publishing. The people who actually create knowledge, professors themselves, are already putting their work on line so you don't have to worry about Ebooks catching on, ever. Professor never made money on the textbook boon-dogle anyway and have much to gain from things like Wiki.
My anatomy class this summer taught me how useless text books are. In my bag, I carried a laptop and sometimes a textbook. The laptop helped out because I could Wiki. One day, I realized that the text book was heavier than the laptop and contained less information. Then I realized that the same could be true for any class. The textbook presented a limited introductory set of information to the subject, which was further limited by the professor to fit time constraints. Had he been with it, he could have his notes taken from and point to Wiki instead of the text and saved his class a bunch of money.
To be fair, the publisher was making efforts to be current. They sent the professor electronic images of illustrations and encouraged a whole host of proprietary, though not DRM'd junk. He published them all as power point presentations in an awkward, enrolled student only "blackboard" space. The format worked out. Students printed the lectures and took notes on them. If the goofey new Power Point forbids printing and acts like dissapearing ink, it won't work at all. Tests, which stated "Perception is licensed to LSU", were a pain and a step backward from paper.
Their efforts won't work. Regular electronic publishing is easier for everyone and Keduca works better than the silly testing system my University bought into.
CPCC should be returning the money and passing the buck onto Apple is their second screw. They punished Apple by extorting the money in the first place. Returning the money will cost Apple another pretty penny that the CPCC should pay. Apple will have to pay the administrative costs of the refund and bear ill will generated by CPCC record keeping mistakes.
In a posting not long after the London attacks, a member of one of the al Qaeda-linked online forums asked how to take action himself. A cell of two or three people is better, replied another member in an exchange translated by the SITE Institute. Even better than that is a "virtual cell, an agreement between a group of brothers over the Internet." It is "safe," extolled the anonymous poster, and "nobody will know the identity of each other in the beginning." Once "harmony and mutual trust" are established, training conducted and videos watched, then "you can meet in reality and execute some operation in the field."
OK, that's creepy, but that's the point of the article. The action implied is killing innocent people. So this is what happens to those who start conversing and working on that action:
Hmmm, I hope there's more than that to go on. It's not hard to make a cell phone blow up a package and (hopefully) not a crime to tell others how. Most cell phones have a vibrator, which can be tapped to trigger a relay or igniter. Anyone who knows how to make explosives go off is sure to also know how to make a cell phone do the work. I hope they have evidence the group was going to actually put bombs in public places. If not, what they are going to jail for is Thought Crime.
Thought Crime is a wonderfully flexible way to put people in jail. I like how the author uses a computer programmer and roll playing game communities for examples.
What, exactly, does wifi change? The average big dumb company has all of their desktops running Outlook, IE and other trash. So every one of their computers is open to exploit from everywhere in the world. So what's a big dumb company to worry about? Their desktops having keyloggers and back orifice put on by any of the 300,000,000 Winblows computers in the world, or someone sitting in their parking lot? Why would anyone go to the trouble of parking outside your building when they can exploit you from afar?
I saw it happen to my computer at the last big dumb company I worked for. I clicked on an email and it exploded porn browsers and started churning the hard drive. I hit the power button. When I reported the incident to the email administrator, they were clueless and thought I was worried about being nailed for porn. They did not believe me either and insisted on clicking the damn thing by pc anywhere. They left without waiting for the results to show, so the stupid thing executed to completion. When I asked them if they wanted to reinstall my machine, they blew it off as "normal advertising". With attitudes like that, the company network was a sieve.
Now these morons at the New York Times would scare people away from wireless networks. Perfect. It's the kind of logic that you see where cell phones with cameras are forbidden but normal cameras and photo copiers are not. Don't you know someone will sell you a solution?
There's another myth out there that's not true. It goes something like, writing software is hard, if you don't give me your money you can't do what you want because no one will write high quality software to do it. The people who spout that line are busy filing absurd business method patents because there are actually lots of people happy to get things done without their help. As for the quality of what the liars put out we have stories like melted's:
Let's see, you're a development manager and you have a crazy schedule forced on you from above by some idiotic VP. Now this guy from product support comes along and tells you about this horrible flaw that will require you to shut down all development for two weeks, slip the schedule and have your best people fix it. Then you shut down testing for a month and have your best testers test it. Then there's a pain of pushing out a patch and notifying the customers and bad PR associated with that.
And so, closed source is a model that does not work and never did. I don't feel sorry for people who work for idiots and don't think others should do as they say to make their lives easier. The tragedy is that people work for idiots and then those idiots make life harder for the rest of us.
How many people have a service like that? It looks like they want to retain their wiretap capability for voice communication as we move into VoIP, not monitor everything you do.
He must have read the EFF site to say something so obviously inflametory and stupid.
The FCC's new proposal to expand CALEA to airline broadband illustrates the fallacy of law enforcement's rationale for its CALEA request. The DOJ takes the position that broadband has "substantially replaced" the local telephone exchange, but this claim is reduced to the point of absurdity aboard an airplane and opens the door for CALEA to cover just about anything.
Combine that with National Security Letters, NSL, and you have something everyone should be concerned with. Also from the EFF, one story down:
NSLs are secret subpoenas for communications logs, issued directly by the FBI without any judicial oversight. These secret subpoenas allow the FBI to demand that online service providers produce records of where their customers go on the Web, as well as what they read and with whom they exchange email. The FBI can even issue NSLs for information about people who haven't committed any crimes.
Your government is looking for dirt on innocent people. The Bush administration has used domestic spying to harass political opposition and we should imagine the same will be applied here. That's something no one should be able to do.
Thanks for the useless commentary, Sheetrock.
The news.com article with the link, "virus target not in vista"? No implications there. We now return you to your daily dose of truth M$ style.
Hi everyone, Stephen Toulouse here. ... Its hard to predict what type of malicious software criminals might develop to attack future versions of operating systems. But rest assured were on the case! The MSRC will be here to investigate and provide the guidance to help protect customers no matter what attacks may impact customers.
The rest of his blog goes on to brag about how Microsoft Users are perfectly safe. Just to prove the point, that buggy new shell won't be there.
In the last 12 minutes, 1/2 of the "unpatched" Windozed boxes were owned by crackers. Perfectly safe indeed.
Not much will be produced without a chimney. All that "water", aka superheated steam, will stay in the room and turn it into a sauna. There should be enough moisture in the air to cool the flame down in short order. Of course, you might prefer a chimney to sweat soaking furniture, but I digress.
Two differences that spring to mind are:
It's more of the same from M$.
That's really poor reasoning. First, "Native" code can require the Paladium code to work. Second, Apple using M$'s Paladium is a sign of the end times!
Really, aren't you just a little worried to see Apple sucking up to M$'s treacherous computing initiative? Dumbass lawmakers will give lip service to this as a "responsible attempt to control piracy" or some other BS and then make anything that does not use it against the law. You know, like no more free software unless it's crippled by some piece of shit from M$.
This is bad, very bad.
Steve, we know you hate your job and wish you had gone into selling insurance but you have to get back to work now and quit astroturfing Slashdot. We pay lots of people in India a hell of a lot less money than we pay you to do this.
-Love, Bill.
Ah, so you support the "free as in slave labor" open-source model?
That is the current "What's mine is mine and what's yours is mine" M$ arrangement. With "Shared Source", they think they are open enough. As the likes of IBM, Correl, Netscape and other huge software houses have been unable to produce quality product or make money in the Winblows world, all you little guys can expect about the same from them.
The short answer to the question, "Could this ever happen?" is yes it can, but they won't and they will say they did anyway. It's all about selling the same old shit by saying whatever they think people want to hear. They have not changed in 20 years, despite people's happiest of fantasies.
That's not obvious. With all the miles of dark fiber in this country and "all you can eat" cell phone plans, you would hope that per byte charges would be a thing of the past. Indeed, only one of Verizon's plans are pay as you go, and Verizon sucks life. So, with a flat fee, what's the point of not letting other people use your bandwith? So you can have your $1,000 goodies to yourself? Those goodies are only valuable when they are attached to a network and the network is only valuable because other people are there.
As more devices we carry around become wifi equipped imagine if your iPod, phone, psp and camera are all enabled & communicating with each other, having them all on a common network and working to each of their strengths
I don't own any devices that don't talk to my laptop so wifi won't offer me anything new. USB and pcmcia card readers work just fine and take much less power than wifi. Still, the are all relatively useless without network access. What's the point of pictures that I can't share with my family? Even the largest music collections go stale. My laptop runs free software because that's the easiest way for me to share things with myself and my friends.