Actually, YOU are the only sentinent being in existance, the world you live in and just about anything else is pure imagination (if you're a solipsist anyways), so wake up already;)
In other news: Martin Weisz just announced the scheduled 2015 release of a reality tv version of The Hills Have Eyes, broadcasting live from South Texas.
1: What kind of person even remotely interesting in anything "Internet Security" would even consider dreaming about considering taking Symantec seriously?
2: Didn't we have this discussion not too long ago except the "List" would've been administered by MSFT (&co), called TCPA (then Palladium then NGSCB then OMGWTFBBQ) and be a little bit more "hardware-assisted"? (For anti-microsoft-fanboy coverage, check out AgainstTCPA, for msft coverage try Microsoft, Wikipedia has some rather neutral insights)
Your browser takes care of securing you against XSS, so you'd make sure it's not an insecuresoftware and use reliableinstead. HTTPS would protect against phishing and "real" man-in-the-middle attacks and the mentioned whitelist would make sure nobody messes with yer browser. Problem solved:)
Some ideas about what factors might support a 'situation that contradicts it':
Buyer doesn't know about Alternatives. (I hear Apple's quite dominant in the U.S. and of course interested in not letting people know about better, cheaper alternatives)
Buyer suffers from Apple-Lock-In (i.e. has iTunes, has purchased (some|lots|all of his) music thru the iTMS and (being Joe Sixpack) doesn't know how to set his files free (remember, we're not talking about geeks here!))
Group pressure (as far as I know, iPods are particularly popular with kids and teenagers (geeky 20-35 demographic may buy quality rather than marketing, large parts of the non-geeky demographic currently sticking with car radios and stationary devices but slowly adopting mp3 players), groups known to have a lot of group pressure
Brand attachment (I'd only count this as half a factor because the fanboys may see the high price as a supportive action towards a company they're attached to (just like buying Windows licenses if you love MSFT))
Most people I talk to are still skeptical of them.
I agree that it is a rather nice product, however I still belong to the skepticists for some reasons:
Privacy (i.e. Google sees everything I do)
Not liking the idea of losing all my docs if Google decides to be bankrupt some day (I know I can store all my docs locally, but that'd defeat most of GDocs advantages
Features (i.e. GDocs "is teh sux" when feature-compared to OOo or even MSO 2007)
Web apps may be nice, but they're made much more than they are. Remember moving away from dumb terminals not too long ago?
Availability (Thanks to WWAN and good mobile networks, I am seldomly disconnected, but I'd like to be able to have my stuff handy when abroad or in a cave (powering my notebook with a miniature nuclear reactor (the cave's deep enough not to let any GSM/802.11/CDMA radio in or Pu radiation out, no threat to National Security® there)))
You're right - the availability of a 20 GB per-film HD format doesn't mean many people are going to use it or force the ISP to prepare it's network to accomodate such use. What seems wrong to me, however, is advertising unlimited access (explicitly as well as implicitly) or using bogus metrics when advertising a limit, in which cases I'd find using up your 24/5 mbps up all the time perfectly legal behaviour.
Oh, and about the becoming devolved spolit children: This has started waaay before the internet. It may be the lastest of such spoildom to occur, but please don't forget about not fire, living in caves anymore, communities of people, medication, social systems, availability of fresh water, ability to purchase food for money instead of hunting it, ability to make money, only having to work 6, 5 instead of 7 days per week, free speech and so on...
Oh, TANSTAAFL won't be right for much longer, too - I'm sure Google will soon start offering ad-sponsored Google Lunch.;)
You mean DVDRs. A DVD Rip can be processed to any kind of release, including XviD (commonly 700 or 2*700 MB per movie, for details see TDX2005 or 2002; whichever you deem relevant), SVCD (2, seldomly 3 or 4 700 MB pieces) and the like.
Additionally, you're completely forgetting the recent rise of High Definition media. To my knowledge there's no standard published in the warez community yet, but up to 10 GB per movie are common with some (few) films being in the 20 GB region.
Assuming one 10 GB Hi-Def movie a day (people are quite likely to watch more than one on a lazy weekend day, compensating not watching one on some weekdays), a bandwidth cap under 300 GB seems really inappropriate. By the way: We haven't figured two or more people sharing an internet connection while not always watching the same films in. Oh... Wikipedia lists about 200 linux distributions, if somebody would wan't to try them all over the course of one year, you'd have to add some 30 GB per month to account for that, too.:)
I don't have an email client on this box (and I'm not going to write this on my cell), so here we go:
Ubuntu Gutsy made all the X and driver configuration really, really simple - I didn't even have to tell it I'm using a tablet, it just worked. The following part is what I assume is being done to make it work.
The serial tablet gets detected on boot and assigned a ttyS* file in/dev/ (/dev/ttyS0 for me) which then (for niceness sake) is linked to by a symlink named/dev/input/wacom.
Ubuntu automatically installed a package named "xserver-xorg-input-wacom" which provides the XOrg "wacom" driver. With a bit of configuration magic, XOrg then uses this driver to talk to/dev/input/wacom:
Repeat the whole section two more times, replacing "stylus" with "eraser" and "cursor" and you're ready to use your stylus as a CorePointer. (If you're using an advanced tablet with more tips/styli/options, refer to the last paragraph of this comment)
The GIMP (File -> Preferences -> Input Devices -> Configure Extended Input Devices) and Inkscape (File -> Input Devices) both use the Gnome "Configure Input Devices" dialog to let you configure XInput; other Apps will probably do that too. Xournal, however, is a bit of an exception as configuration is done directly in the "Options" menu and a bit less extensive (but it allows you to use eraser and highlighter tips correctly).
If you're using a USB tablet, the first part might be a little bit more difficult; but I seem to recall having seen some rather nice-looking documentation at wacom (or perhaps it was somewhere else on the endless web of intertubes connecting human knowledge..) Google will certainly help you find it.
So what exactly makes one who tries to use one of best (in terms of supported input and output formats, speed and ease of use) media players (please note the term media player. I am not talking about libraries (iTunes & co.) or nagware (QuickTime)) with actually comes in an OS-X-specific version a serious fucktard?
Ever tried using a graphics tablet as your core pointer in Ubuntu?
I did. Ubuntu Gutsy Tribe 5 detected and configured my Wacom touchscreen (which, from a driver/config PoV, is equal to a Wacom graphics tablet) without me having to even press a button or anything to that avail. And with just a few more clicks in The Gimp, Inkscape and Xournal, pressure sensitivity, eraser tip and everything else worked perfectly fine (as an XInput instead of CorePointer device).
I don't remember exactly but I think not too long ago Viacom sent about one million takedown requests to YouTube. As far as I know, quite a lot* of these were unjustified, but very few users actually took the time to issue a counter-claim.
Now as far as I understand, filing a false DMCA Takedown Request is considered rather evil with perjury and the like probably netting the offender a nice fine and/or an enjoyable vacation behind bars.
Assuming that 5% of Viacom's notices weren't justified and 2% of all affected users had reacted, Viacom could have been taken to court for perjury by a thousand different people. D'you think they would've been fine? Or would this have sucked so much that they'd check before sending the next few takedown requests, saving YouTube quite a bit of work (and strenghtening their legal position in further DMCA-related cases)?
Been forced upon him like listening to the default radio station is forced upon you whenever in your car? MS Windows is an Operating fucking System, developed and sold by a private entity. It's like those disgusting olives that are put on some pizzas. If your taste's bad enough or you don't want to be bothered with removing them, you eat 'em; if you don't like them, replacing them with ham (linux), pieces of ananas (bsd) or anything else is done within minutes.
Don't forget about the incredibly nice Quick Settings Menu (F12), direct validation of HTML pages (Ctrl+Alt+V), mouse gestures, speed dial (new tab shows small previews of your nine favourite sites; stays fast), in-browser editing of pages (Ctrl + F3), address bar searches (try googling for "some.conf" in firefox... in Opera it's as simple as "g some.conf". Allows you to create your OWN searches (i => imdb, w => wikipedia, f => in-page search) or the keyboard shortcuts Prefs -> Advanced -> Shortcuts. Oh and since I'm forced to use the sluggish Firefox at work: Don't forget about Opera's blazingly fast browsing speed.
Scenario: You've got this big-ass HTML page in which you're looking for one word (e.g. "canada").
Firefox: You press Ctrl+F or / and start typing. Each letter you type will be greeted by a bit of a slowdown (remember, big-ass page) and the position will wildly change to all first instances of "can" and the like.
Opera: Since the page is big and you're only looking for "canada", not "can", "canadian" or "cable car", you'll press Ctrl+F, type "canada" and, after pressing enter, will quickly know if canada is mentioned in the current page. Additionally this will have caused less load on your system and, in the case of no mentions of canada, won't have changed your current position on the page.
Don't forget to factor in interest. While $200 would generate about $33 over two years at 8 percent per year, $108 over one year would only generate some $9 (resulting in $233 vs. $227).
Those numbers are probably quite a bit off (Interest would probably be calculated on a daily basis; Apple's interest expectations may be higher), but I couln't imagine Apple not having thought this through very, very deeply (until AT&T can screw up however bad they want to without affecting Steve's profits too much).
You buy it for $70 and get attached to or in the box a little flyer telling you what (UPN, proof of purchase, slice of pizza) where to get a check for $30 in the next few months.
According to some (can't link to the source, stupid forgetfulness), about 80% (sometimes even more) of these rebates won't be paid out (usually because they aren't sent in or are sent in without the necessary information). On average this $30 rebate will have cost the manufacturer $6 per item while they could advertise $30 in savings.
Are we talking about the "if one tank fails the other three will be okay and fully unable to position the satellite" kind of redundancy here? I don't really see any advantage of that over "if the one tank fails we'll be fully unable to position the satellite (while saving millions on three tanks and an expensive-as-fuck fuel balancing system)".
Why would they need to use a Rootkit (that hides a directory and some processes) to display an eye on the screen?
Sony-bashing's cool with me; I find much of their software and general behavior to be inappropriate too, but please keep it where it's appropriate. In this case we'd be talking about a government-sanctioned visible virus/program, not a rootkit.
heavy network usage, which would normally only occur on work-related machines
So, where exactly will your normal work-related machine generate really heavy network usage? I looked at the Performance Monitor during the past few minutes and my 1 Gbps link never went past 1% of usage. I may not have performed anything that would've needed too much bandwidth, but I can't really imagine any business-related task to do that, either. CVS/SVN, Active Directory, Outlook-MAPI, RDP and even most Apps on network shares won't - in my experience - really let you feel being capped at 1.5 instead of 12 or 120 mBps. In my experience the *nix world's less hungry for bandwidth anyways, so I won't even mention it.
Did I completely forget about something here or is that cap actually not that big of a problem in a business (as opposed to "gaming"/"hd-media-streaming") network?
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, YOU are the only sentinent being in existance, the world you live in and just about anything else is pure imagination (if you're a solipsist anyways), so wake up already ;)
In other news: Martin Weisz just announced the scheduled 2015 release of a reality tv version of The Hills Have Eyes, broadcasting live from South Texas.
1: What kind of person even remotely interesting in anything "Internet Security" would even consider dreaming about considering taking Symantec seriously?
2: Didn't we have this discussion not too long ago except the "List" would've been administered by MSFT (&co), called TCPA (then Palladium then NGSCB then OMGWTFBBQ) and be a little bit more "hardware-assisted"? (For anti-microsoft-fanboy coverage, check out AgainstTCPA, for msft coverage try Microsoft, Wikipedia has some rather neutral insights)
(n/t)
You're right - the availability of a 20 GB per-film HD format doesn't mean many people are going to use it or force the ISP to prepare it's network to accomodate such use. What seems wrong to me, however, is advertising unlimited access (explicitly as well as implicitly) or using bogus metrics when advertising a limit, in which cases I'd find using up your 24/5 mbps up all the time perfectly legal behaviour.
;)
Oh, and about the becoming devolved spolit children: This has started waaay before the internet. It may be the lastest of such spoildom to occur, but please don't forget about not fire, living in caves anymore, communities of people, medication, social systems, availability of fresh water, ability to purchase food for money instead of hunting it, ability to make money, only having to work 6, 5 instead of 7 days per week, free speech and so on...
Oh, TANSTAAFL won't be right for much longer, too - I'm sure Google will soon start offering ad-sponsored Google Lunch.
Additionally, you're completely forgetting the recent rise of High Definition media. To my knowledge there's no standard published in the warez community yet, but up to 10 GB per movie are common with some (few) films being in the 20 GB region.
Assuming one 10 GB Hi-Def movie a day (people are quite likely to watch more than one on a lazy weekend day, compensating not watching one on some weekdays), a bandwidth cap under 300 GB seems really inappropriate. By the way: We haven't figured two or more people sharing an internet connection while not always watching the same films in. Oh... Wikipedia lists about 200 linux distributions, if somebody would wan't to try them all over the course of one year, you'd have to add some 30 GB per month to account for that, too.
Ubuntu Gutsy made all the X and driver configuration really, really simple - I didn't even have to tell it I'm using a tablet, it just worked. The following part is what I assume is being done to make it work.
The serial tablet gets detected on boot and assigned a ttyS* file in
The GIMP (File -> Preferences -> Input Devices -> Configure Extended Input Devices) and Inkscape (File -> Input Devices) both use the Gnome "Configure Input Devices" dialog to let you configure XInput; other Apps will probably do that too. Xournal, however, is a bit of an exception as configuration is done directly in the "Options" menu and a bit less extensive (but it allows you to use eraser and highlighter tips correctly).
If you're using a USB tablet, the first part might be a little bit more difficult; but I seem to recall having seen some rather nice-looking documentation at wacom (or perhaps it was somewhere else on the endless web of intertubes connecting human knowledge..) Google will certainly help you find it.
So what exactly makes one who tries to use one of best (in terms of supported input and output formats, speed and ease of use) media players (please note the term media player. I am not talking about libraries (iTunes & co.) or nagware (QuickTime)) with actually comes in an OS-X-specific version a serious fucktard?
*: I don't know any numbers but have heard and read numerous personal accounts of authors of taken down material.
I don't remember exactly but I think not too long ago Viacom sent about one million takedown requests to YouTube. As far as I know, quite a lot* of these were unjustified, but very few users actually took the time to issue a counter-claim.
Now as far as I understand, filing a false DMCA Takedown Request is considered rather evil with perjury and the like probably netting the offender a nice fine and/or an enjoyable vacation behind bars.
Assuming that 5% of Viacom's notices weren't justified and 2% of all affected users had reacted, Viacom could have been taken to court for perjury by a thousand different people. D'you think they would've been fine? Or would this have sucked so much that they'd check before sending the next few takedown requests, saving YouTube quite a bit of work (and strenghtening their legal position in further DMCA-related cases)?
Actually, just wait a few months and Opera 9.5 will be out with a brand-new, OS-X-ified interface (on OS X).
Don't forget about the incredibly nice Quick Settings Menu (F12), direct validation of HTML pages (Ctrl+Alt+V), mouse gestures, speed dial (new tab shows small previews of your nine favourite sites; stays fast), in-browser editing of pages (Ctrl + F3), address bar searches (try googling for "some.conf" in firefox... in Opera it's as simple as "g some.conf". Allows you to create your OWN searches (i => imdb, w => wikipedia, f => in-page search) or the keyboard shortcuts Prefs -> Advanced -> Shortcuts. Oh and since I'm forced to use the sluggish Firefox at work: Don't forget about Opera's blazingly fast browsing speed.
Scenario: You've got this big-ass HTML page in which you're looking for one word (e.g. "canada").
Firefox: You press Ctrl+F or / and start typing. Each letter you type will be greeted by a bit of a slowdown (remember, big-ass page) and the position will wildly change to all first instances of "can" and the like. Opera: Since the page is big and you're only looking for "canada", not "can", "canadian" or "cable car", you'll press Ctrl+F, type "canada" and, after pressing enter, will quickly know if canada is mentioned in the current page. Additionally this will have caused less load on your system and, in the case of no mentions of canada, won't have changed your current position on the page.
Don't forget to factor in interest. While $200 would generate about $33 over two years at 8 percent per year, $108 over one year would only generate some $9 (resulting in $233 vs. $227).
Those numbers are probably quite a bit off (Interest would probably be calculated on a daily basis; Apple's interest expectations may be higher), but I couln't imagine Apple not having thought this through very, very deeply (until AT&T can screw up however bad they want to without affecting Steve's profits too much).
You buy it for $70 and get attached to or in the box a little flyer telling you what (UPN, proof of purchase, slice of pizza) where to get a check for $30 in the next few months.
According to some (can't link to the source, stupid forgetfulness), about 80% (sometimes even more) of these rebates won't be paid out (usually because they aren't sent in or are sent in without the necessary information). On average this $30 rebate will have cost the manufacturer $6 per item while they could advertise $30 in savings.
Are we talking about the "if one tank fails the other three will be okay and fully unable to position the satellite" kind of redundancy here? I don't really see any advantage of that over "if the one tank fails we'll be fully unable to position the satellite (while saving millions on three tanks and an expensive-as-fuck fuel balancing system)".
Why would they need to use a Rootkit (that hides a directory and some processes) to display an eye on the screen?
Sony-bashing's cool with me; I find much of their software and general behavior to be inappropriate too, but please keep it where it's appropriate. In this case we'd be talking about a government-sanctioned visible virus/program, not a rootkit.
Did I completely forget about something here or is that cap actually not that big of a problem in a business (as opposed to "gaming"/"hd-media-streaming") network?